On 09/09/16 10:22 +0000, John Davidge wrote:
Thierry Carrez wrote:

[...]
In the last years there were a lot of "questions" asked by random
contributors, especially around the "One OpenStack" principle (which
seems to fuel most of the reaction here). Remarks like "we should really
decide once and for all if OpenStack is a collection of independent
projects, or one thing".

A lot of people actually ignore that this question was already asked,
pretty early on (by John Dickinson in June 2011). Back then it was
settled by the PPB (the ancestor to the TC). You can read it all
here[1]. It was never brought again as a proposed change to the TC, so
that decision from June 2011 is still defining how we should think about
OpenStack.

Most of the TC members know the governance history and know those
principles. That is, after all, one of the reasons you elect them for.
But we realized that the people asking those questions again and again
were not at fault. It was our failure to *document* this history
properly which caused the issue. Took us some time to gather the courage
to write it, then finally Monty wrote a draft, and I turned it into a
change.

To provide a counter point, I think the reason this question is asked so
often is not because the TC has failed to *document* this policy, but that
it has failed to *comply* with it.

I¹m of course referring to the introduction of The Big Tent. This is the
moment that OpenStack stopped being: ³A single product made of a lot of
independent, but cooperating, components.² And became: ³A collection of
independent projects that work together for some level of integration and
releases.²

This is in direct contradiction to the stated and collectively understood
goal of the project, and has left many scratching their heads.

The principles as written in the review do not accurately describe the
current state of the project. To make it so that they do, we either need
to change the principles or change the project. As I see it, our options
are:

1. Adjust the project to reflect the principles by abolishing The Big Tent.
2. Adjust the principles to reflect the project by redefining it as: ³A
collection of independent projects that work together for some level of
integration and releases.²

I think #2 is missing a critical part, which is that these "independent"
projects are working towards a unified mission. This differentiates OpenStack
from many other communities out there and it helps understanding the principles
and other changes a bit better. But I might be biased here :/

Either way, writing down this principles has proven the effort useful already.
It doesn't matter if the outcome is a well thought-out document or a set of
changes to the community. The time spent writing this document is already
helping us to get rid of some tribal knowledge.

Flavio

--
@flaper87
Flavio Percoco

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Reply via email to