i won't speak to whether this confirms/refutes the usefulness of the big
tent. that said, probably as a by-product of being in non-stop meetings
with sales/marketing/managers for last few days, i think there needs to
be better definitions (or better publicised definitions) of what the
goals of the big tent are. from my experience, they've heard of the big
tent and they are, to varying degrees, critical of it. one common point
is that they see it as greater fragmentation to a process that is
already too slow.
just giving my fly-on-the-wall view from the other side.
On 15/06/2015 6:20 AM, Joe Gordon wrote:
One of the stated problems the 'big tent' is supposed to solve is:
'The binary nature of the integrated release results in projects
outside the integrated release failing to get the recognition they
deserve. "Non-official" projects are second- or third-class citizens
which can't get development resources. Alternative solutions can't
emerge in the shadow of the blessed approach. Becoming part of the
integrated release, which was originally designed to be a technical
decision, quickly became a life-or-death question for new projects,
and a political/community minefield.' [0]
Meaning projects should see an uptick in development once they drop
their second-class citizenship and join OpenStack. Now that we have
been living in the world of the big tent for several months now, we
can see if this claim is true.
Below is a list of the first few few projects to join OpenStack after
the big tent, All of which have now been part of OpenStack for at
least two months.[1]
* Mangum - Tue Mar 24 20:17:36 2015
* Murano - Tue Mar 24 20:48:25 2015
* Congress - Tue Mar 31 20:24:04 2015
* Rally - Tue Apr 7 21:25:53 2015
When looking at stackalytics [2] for each project, we don't see any
noticeably change in number of reviews, contributors, or number of
commits from before and after each project joined OpenStack.
So what does this mean? At least in the short term moving from
Stackforge to OpenStack does not result in an increase in development
resources (too early to know about the long term). One of the three
reasons for the big tent appears to be unfounded, but the other two
reasons hold. The only thing I think this information changes is what
peoples expectations should be when applying to join OpenStack.
[0]
https://github.com/openstack/governance/blob/master/resolutions/20141202-project-structure-reform-spec.rst
[1] Ignoring OpenStackClent since the repos were always in OpenStack
it just didn't have a formal home in the governance repo.
[2] h
<http://stackalytics.com/?module=openstackclient-group&metric=commits>_http://stackalytics.com/?module=magnum-group&metric=commits_
__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
--
gord
__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
