On Wed, 17 Feb 2016, Doug Hellmann wrote:
Excerpts from Jay Pipes's message of 2016-02-17 13:25:58 -0500:
I think we are doing a bad job of communicating the product vs. kit
nature of OpenStack.
Yeah, I tend to think that's it, too.
I'll concede to that and agree we can and should do better.
If it's "kit" not "product" I think the newly proposed[1] mission statement
doesn't convey the right message, to me:
To produce a ubiquitous Open Source Cloud Computing platform that is
easy to use, simple to implement, interoperable between deployments,
works well at all scales, and meets the needs of users and operators
of both public and private clouds.
The ambiguity is in "platform" which I would read as "a thing I
can use to do some stuff" not "bits I need to put together first
before I can do some stuff".
I might be coming at this from a non-enterprise standpoint (with
regard to "platform").
I realize I'm being annoyingly pedantic here, but it seems while we're
on the topic and have identified a problem we may as well beat it to
death...If people aren't into doing so, that's cool, I mean these
comments merely as observations, with good intent and in good humor.
[1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/281463/
--
Chris Dent (�s°□°)�s�喋擤ォ� http://anticdent.org/
freenode: cdent tw: @anticdent__________________________________________________________________________
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
