On Fri, 2014-06-06 at 13:29 -0400, Anita Kuno wrote: > The issue I have with the word certify is that it requires someone or a > group of someones to attest to something. The thing attested to is only > as credible as the someone or the group of someones doing the attesting. > We have no process, nor do I feel we want to have a process for > evaluating the reliability of the somones or groups of someones doing > the attesting. > > I think that having testing in place in line with other programs testing > of patches (third party ci) in cinder should be sufficient to address > the underlying concern, namely reliability of opensource hooks to > proprietary code and/or hardware. I would like the use of the word > "certificate" and all its roots to no longer be used in OpenStack > programs with regard to testing. This won't happen until we get some > discussion and agreement on this, which I would like to have.
Thanks for bringing this up Anita. I agree that "certified driver" or similar would suggest something other than I think we mean. And, for whatever its worth, the topic did come up at a Foundation board meeting and some board members expressed similar concerns, although I guess that was more precisely about the prospect of the Foundation calling drivers "certified". Mark. _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
