On 19/08/14 10:37, Jay Pipes wrote:
By graduating an incubated project into the integrated release, the Technical Committee is blessing the project as "the OpenStack way" to do some thing. If there are projects that are developed *in the OpenStack ecosystem* that are actively being developed to serve the purpose that an integrated project serves, then I think it is the responsibility of the Technical Committee to take another look at the integrated project and answer the following questions definitively: a) Is the Thing that the project addresses something that the Technical Committee believes the OpenStack ecosystem benefits from by the TC making a judgement on what is "the "OpenStack way" of addressing that Thing. and IFF the decision of the TC on a) is YES, then: b) Is the Vision and Implementation of the currently integrated project the one that the Technical Committee wishes to continue to "bless" as the "the OpenStack way" of addressing the Thing the project does.
I disagree with part (b); projects are not code - projects, like Soylent Green, are people. So it's not critical that the implementation is the one the TC wants to bless, what's critical is that the right people are involved to get to an implementation that the TC would be comfortable blessing over time. For example, everyone agrees that Ceilometer has room for improvement, but any implication that the Ceilometer is not interested in or driving towards those improvements (because of NIH or whatever) is, as has been pointed out, grossly unfair to the Ceilometer team.
I think the rest of your plan is a way of recognising this appropriately, that the current implementation is actually not the be-all and end-all of how the TC should view a project.
cheers, Zane. _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
