Dean Troyer wrote:
On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 4:57 AM, Thierry Carrez <thie...@openstack.org <mailto:thie...@openstack.org>> wrote:My personal take on that is that we can draw a line in the sand for what is acceptable as an official project in the upstream OpenStack open source effort. It should have a fully-functional, production-grade open source implementation. If you need proprietary software or a commercial entity to fully use the functionality of a project or getting serious about it, then it should not be accepted in OpenStack as an official project. It can still live as a non-official project and even be hosted under OpenStack infrastructure, but it should not be part of "OpenStack". That is how I would interpret "no open core" in OpenStack 2016.Should we host projects that have no hope of becoming official projects due to this sort of criteria? Would we host GPL-only projects under openstack/?
The answer to that lives at: http://governance.openstack.org/reference/licensing.html -- Thierry Carrez (ttx) __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
