Sorry if you mistook my note. I was referring solely to having the PPB vote *separately* on the API and the project incubation status. I was saying that the two don't have to be done at the same time...
Apologies for any confusion... -jay On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 2:01 PM, Chuck Thier <[email protected]> wrote: > While, I'm not on the board any more, I would just like to chime in a bit: > The proposal for API for block storage was presented both at the design > summit, and on the mailing list afterwards. All I received from that was > good feedback, and enough to continue our effort. But, before we try to > offer an official spec for Nova block storage API, we felt it would be best > to prove the design out a bit first (which is the current stage we are in). > Once the code is released, and the API design is a bit more proven, then it > will be offered up again as a more official spec for Nova block storage. > If I did not make this clear enough previously, I apologize. > -- > Chuck > On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 12:05 PM, Jay Pipes <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> I'd like to point out that incubation of a project and a proposed API >> are two very different things, and if we couple them too tightly, we >> will make unnecessary problems for ourselves. >> >> I feel that there should be ZERO barrier to entry for the proposal of >> the API spec. Once people determine what the API should look like, >> teams are then free to implement the API any way they choose. This >> way, we will be governing the OpenStack *APIs* and we can more easily >> determine incubation status by looking to see if the project has >> implemented the proposed API for their endpoint and have tests to >> prove it. >> >> Just a thought. It would be much easier to discuss the proposed >> Network and Volume APIs versus discussing whether team Lunr or team >> Quantum are doing a good job implementing an API we don't know about >> yet. >> >> -jay >> >> On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 12:59 PM, John Purrier <[email protected]> wrote: >> > With the suggested changes and a clear message around timing and >> > promotion >> > criteria I vote +1. Consider this my absentee ballot. >> > >> > We really need to get projects such as Quantum and Lunr into incubation >> > so >> > we can get some level of control over the network and volume APIs and >> > services. I think the network guys are doing a good job of being open >> > and >> > engaged, the volume effort less so. >> > >> > With the work being done to incorporate Keystone as part of all the >> > project >> > data flows, this is another key project we should consider asap. I also >> > think these three projects must have serious consideration as promotion >> > to >> > core at the E DS, we should quickly set expectations amongst the teams >> > and >> > community correctly. With the level of commitment incubation implies I >> > can >> > direct Monty, Soren, Thierry, et al toward integrating these projects >> > into >> > the build/qa/packaging automation processes. >> > >> > John >> > >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: [email protected] >> > [mailto:[email protected]] On >> > Behalf Of Jonathan Bryce >> > Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2011 8:11 AM >> > To: [email protected] >> > Subject: Re: [Openstack-poc] PPB Meeting on June 2nd >> > >> > I agree that this makes sense as well. Something along the lines of >> > projects >> > can enter incubation at any point, projects that feel like they're ready >> > to >> > move to core will be voted on 6 weeks prior to design summit to be >> > promoted >> > or not. PTLs will be elected 4 weeks before (I believe this is the >> > existing >> > schedule). If you guys agree with this, I'll update the wiki pages >> > dealing >> > with this. >> > >> > Does anyone have any other feedback on the incubation related pages: >> > >> > http://wiki.openstack.org/ProjectTypes >> > http://wiki.openstack.org/Governance/Proposed/Incubation >> > http://wiki.openstack.org/Projects/IncubatorApplication >> > >> > I want to get these locked down so we can get clarity with some of the >> > projects that are kind of in a limbo state. I'd really like to vote on >> > the >> > incubation definitions in the meeting tomorrow. Feel free to do an >> > absentee >> > ballot before then on the mailing list if you won't be able to make the >> > meeting. >> > >> > Jonathan. >> > >> > >> > On Jun 1, 2011, at 7:21 AM, Eric Day wrote: >> > >> >> +1 >> >> >> >> On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 02:28:04PM -0700, Joshua McKenty wrote: >> >>> +1 >> >>> >> >>> Joshua McKenty >> >>> Piston Cloud Computing, Inc. >> >>> (650) 283-6846 >> >>> [email protected] >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> On 2011-05-31, at 10:15 AM, John Purrier wrote: >> >>> >> >>>> +1. >> >>>> >> >>>> This will not slow the development of the projects and allows logical >> >>>> management of the projects to be promoted to "core". In order to make >> > this >> >>>> happen we will need to lead the DS timelines, as ttx points out, to >> > allow >> >>>> PTL elections and to involve the new project PTL's in the upcoming DS >> >>>> planning. >> >>>> >> >>>> This timeline should be published as part of the overall project >> > lifecycle >> >>>> we are developing (inception/affiliated -> incubation -> core >> >>>> project). >> >>>> Always recognizing that some projects will stop/hold at specific >> >>>> steps >> > in >> >>>> the process (not all project should/can progress to incubated or >> >>>> core). >> >>>> >> >>>> John >> >>>> >> >>>> -----Original Message----- >> >>>> From: [email protected] >> >>>> [mailto:[email protected]] >> >>>> On >> >>>> Behalf Of Thierry Carrez >> >>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2011 4:35 AM >> >>>> To: [email protected] >> >>>> Subject: [Openstack-poc] PPB Meeting on June 2nd >> >>>> >> >>>> Hey everyone, >> >>>> >> >>>> I won't be able to make the PPB meeting this Thursday. This is a bank >> >>>> holiday over here and we are having people for dinner. If you have >> >>>> the >> >>>> meeting without me, just a few remarks about Core projects promotion >> >>>> vs. >> >>>> release management. >> >>>> >> >>>> I think projects shouldn't be promoted to "Core projects" status in >> >>>> the >> >>>> middle of a development cycle. The reason is that I need to follow >> >>>> Core >> >>>> projects from a release management perspective (plans, milestone >> >>>> contents, etc.) and you can't just start doing it in the middle of a >> >>>> cycle and pray for a successful coordinated release at the end. They >> >>>> need to be Core projects for the whole cycle, so decided before the >> >>>> design summit time. >> >>>> >> >>>> So we can definitely promote projects to Incubation status, at which >> >>>> point I'd start educating them on release management requirements to >> >>>> make sure they can move to Core status for the next release. And we >> >>>> should decide, at least one month before the design summit, that a >> >>>> given >> >>>> Incubating project will be a Core project for the E development >> >>>> cycle. >> >>>> The corresponding PTLs can then join in time the design summit >> >>>> organization committee and the PPB. >> >>>> >> >>>> But IMHO we shouldn't promote Dashboard, or Burrow, or ScalR to Core >> >>>> status for Diablo, since Diablo is already well started. >> >>>> >> >>>> At that point I'd concentrate our efforts in defining "Incubation" >> >>>> and >> >>>> making sure the right projects enter that state ASAP. >> >>>> >> >>>> -- >> >>>> Thierry Carrez (ttx) >> >>>> Release Manager, OpenStack >> >>>> >> >>>> _______________________________________________ >> >>>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack-poc >> >>>> Post to : [email protected] >> >>>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack-poc >> >>>> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> _______________________________________________ >> >>>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack-poc >> >>>> Post to : [email protected] >> >>>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack-poc >> >>>> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> _______________________________________________ >> >>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack-poc >> >>> Post to : [email protected] >> >>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack-poc >> >>> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack-poc >> >> Post to : [email protected] >> >> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack-poc >> >> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack-poc >> > Post to : [email protected] >> > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack-poc >> > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack-poc >> > Post to : [email protected] >> > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack-poc >> > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp >> > >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack-poc >> Post to : [email protected] >> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack-poc >> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp > > _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack-poc Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack-poc More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
