Login | Register For Free | Help
Search for: (Advanced)

Mailing List Archive: OpenStack: Foundation

OpenStack Mission & Goals

 

 

First page Previous page 1 2 Next page Last page  View All OpenStack foundation RSS feed   Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded


thierry at openstack

Oct 20, 2011, 6:13 AM

Post #1 of 26 (881 views)
Permalink
OpenStack Mission & Goals

Hello everyone,

During the town hall meeting at the Conference, lots of different people
raised the need to define the OpenStack mission as the very first step
to setting up a Foundation.

I tend to agree that defining the OpenStack goals helps, in turn, to
define the Foundation scope (what should the foundation actually own,
see prior thread), which is rather critical in deciding the best setup.

That said, I'm not sure there can be lazy consensus in the "community"
around OpenStack goals. Some value-add partner will prefer if OpenStack
Core projects don't enter his space (restrict goals), while some public
cloud provider might prefer a wider ecosystem (expand goals).

So this discussion on "what is OpenStack and what is not" might have to
happen after the Foundation is set up and you have boards with the
responsibility to decide and vote on that...

Thoughts ? Should the egg happen before the chicken ?

--
Thierry Carrez (ttx)
Release Manager, OpenStack
_______________________________________________
Foundation mailing list
Foundation at lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation


jaypipes at gmail

Oct 20, 2011, 9:00 AM

Post #2 of 26 (865 views)
Permalink
OpenStack Mission & Goals [In reply to]

On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 9:13 AM, Thierry Carrez <thierry at openstack.org> wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> During the town hall meeting at the Conference, lots of different people
> raised the need to define the OpenStack mission as the very first step
> to setting up a Foundation.
>
> I tend to agree that defining the OpenStack goals helps, in turn, to
> define the Foundation scope (what should the foundation actually own,
> see prior thread), which is rather critical in deciding the best setup.
>
> That said, I'm not sure there can be lazy consensus in the "community"
> around OpenStack goals. Some value-add partner will prefer if OpenStack
> Core projects don't enter his space (restrict goals), while some public
> cloud provider might prefer a wider ecosystem (expand goals).
>
> So this discussion on "what is OpenStack and what is not" might have to
> happen after the Foundation is set up and you have boards with the
> responsibility to decide and vote on that...
>
> Thoughts ? Should the egg happen before the chicken ?

I think a discussion about what OpenStack is and isn't should
definitely be had before the Foundation is set up. Otherwise, I
imagine people will view the Foundation as being some sort of Wild
West land grab, where companies are trying to shape what OpenStack is
by fiat or by trying to buy control.

Just a thought,
-jay


Cole.Crawford at nebula

Oct 20, 2011, 9:03 AM

Post #3 of 26 (869 views)
Permalink
OpenStack Mission & Goals [In reply to]

On 10/20/11 9:00 AM, "Jay Pipes" <jaypipes at gmail.com> wrote:

>On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 9:13 AM, Thierry Carrez <thierry at openstack.org>
>wrote:
>> Hello everyone,
>>
>> During the town hall meeting at the Conference, lots of different people
>> raised the need to define the OpenStack mission as the very first step
>> to setting up a Foundation.
>>
>> I tend to agree that defining the OpenStack goals helps, in turn, to
>> define the Foundation scope (what should the foundation actually own,
>> see prior thread), which is rather critical in deciding the best setup.
>>
>> That said, I'm not sure there can be lazy consensus in the "community"
>> around OpenStack goals. Some value-add partner will prefer if OpenStack
>> Core projects don't enter his space (restrict goals), while some public
>> cloud provider might prefer a wider ecosystem (expand goals).
>>
>> So this discussion on "what is OpenStack and what is not" might have to
>> happen after the Foundation is set up and you have boards with the
>> responsibility to decide and vote on that...
>>
>> Thoughts ? Should the egg happen before the chicken ?
>
>I think a discussion about what OpenStack is and isn't should
>definitely be had before the Foundation is set up. Otherwise, I
>imagine people will view the Foundation as being some sort of Wild
>West land grab, where companies are trying to shape what OpenStack is
>by fiat or by trying to buy control.
>
>Just a thought,
>-jay

Jay,

I agree 100%!
>_______________________________________________
>Foundation mailing list
>Foundation at lists.openstack.org
>http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>


_______________________________________________
Foundation mailing list
Foundation at lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation


pat.pushor at cloudchronicle

Oct 20, 2011, 9:04 AM

Post #4 of 26 (867 views)
Permalink
OpenStack Mission & Goals [In reply to]

That is a great point Jay. I think the last thing anybody wants is
the perception that organizations coming on-board as part of the
foundation are influencing the direction of the product. Having a
preexisting basic charter or at least definition of the project and
project goals before this process should help with that risk.

On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 10:00 AM, Jay Pipes <jaypipes at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 9:13 AM, Thierry Carrez <thierry at openstack.org> wrote:
>> Hello everyone,
>>
>> During the town hall meeting at the Conference, lots of different people
>> raised the need to define the OpenStack mission as the very first step
>> to setting up a Foundation.
>>
>> I tend to agree that defining the OpenStack goals helps, in turn, to
>> define the Foundation scope (what should the foundation actually own,
>> see prior thread), which is rather critical in deciding the best setup.
>>
>> That said, I'm not sure there can be lazy consensus in the "community"
>> around OpenStack goals. Some value-add partner will prefer if OpenStack
>> Core projects don't enter his space (restrict goals), while some public
>> cloud provider might prefer a wider ecosystem (expand goals).
>>
>> So this discussion on "what is OpenStack and what is not" might have to
>> happen after the Foundation is set up and you have boards with the
>> responsibility to decide and vote on that...
>>
>> Thoughts ? Should the egg happen before the chicken ?
>
> I think a discussion about what OpenStack is and isn't should
> definitely be had before the Foundation is set up. Otherwise, I
> imagine people will view the Foundation as being some sort of Wild
> West land grab, where companies are trying to shape what OpenStack is
> by fiat or by trying to buy control.
>
> Just a thought,
> -jay
> _______________________________________________
> Foundation mailing list
> Foundation at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>



--

Patrick Pushor
CTO & Founder
CloudChronicle.com
http://cloudchronicle.com
_______________________________________________
Foundation mailing list
Foundation at lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation


rick at openstack

Oct 20, 2011, 9:27 AM

Post #5 of 26 (868 views)
Permalink
OpenStack Mission & Goals [In reply to]

On 10/20/2011 11:00 AM, Jay Pipes wrote:

>
> I think a discussion about what OpenStack is and isn't should
> definitely be had before the Foundation is set up. Otherwise, I
> imagine people will view the Foundation as being some sort of Wild
> West land grab, where companies are trying to shape what OpenStack is
> by fiat or by trying to buy control.
>
> Just a thought,
> -jay

I completely agree, but there is no framework in place for making
decisions. A discussion is fine, but what we really need is a decision.



> _______________________________________________
> Foundation mailing list
> Foundation at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 262 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation/attachments/20111020/769aad1d/attachment.pgp>


sandy.walsh at RACKSPACE

Oct 20, 2011, 9:49 AM

Post #6 of 26 (869 views)
Permalink
OpenStack Mission & Goals [In reply to]

+1

How can you decide if you want to join a foundation if you don't know what it stands for?

-S


----
I think a discussion about what OpenStack is and isn't should
definitely be had before the Foundation is set up. Otherwise, I
imagine people will view the Foundation as being some sort of Wild
West land grab, where companies are trying to shape what OpenStack is
by fiat or by trying to buy control.

Just a thought,
-jay
_______________________________________________
Foundation mailing list
Foundation at lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
This email may include confidential information. If you received it in error, please delete it.


jan_drake at hotmail

Oct 21, 2011, 9:18 AM

Post #7 of 26 (868 views)
Permalink
OpenStack Mission & Goals [In reply to]

+1




On Oct 20, 2011, at 9:49 AM, Sandy Walsh <sandy.walsh at RACKSPACE.COM> wrote:

> +1
>
> How can you decide if you want to join a foundation if you don't know what it stands for?
>
> -S
>
>
> ----
> I think a discussion about what OpenStack is and isn't should
> definitely be had before the Foundation is set up. Otherwise, I
> imagine people will view the Foundation as being some sort of Wild
> West land grab, where companies are trying to shape what OpenStack is
> by fiat or by trying to buy control.
>
> Just a thought,
> -jay
> _______________________________________________
> Foundation mailing list
> Foundation at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
> This email may include confidential information. If you received it in error, please delete it.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Foundation mailing list
> Foundation at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>


jan_drake at hotmail

Jan 4, 2012, 5:14 PM

Post #8 of 26 (866 views)
Permalink
OpenStack Mission & Goals [In reply to]

So, no messages since October. Rumor has it the effort is dead or indefinitely delayed... what's the deal?


Jan


> From: jan_drake at hotmail.com
> Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 09:18:46 -0700
> To: sandy.walsh at RACKSPACE.COM
> CC: foundation at lists.openstack.org
> Subject: Re: [OpenStack Foundation] OpenStack Mission & Goals
>
> +1
>
>
>
>
> On Oct 20, 2011, at 9:49 AM, Sandy Walsh <sandy.walsh at RACKSPACE.COM> wrote:
>
> > +1
> >
> > How can you decide if you want to join a foundation if you don't know what it stands for?
> >
> > -S
> >
> >
> > ----
> > I think a discussion about what OpenStack is and isn't should
> > definitely be had before the Foundation is set up. Otherwise, I
> > imagine people will view the Foundation as being some sort of Wild
> > West land grab, where companies are trying to shape what OpenStack is
> > by fiat or by trying to buy control.
> >
> > Just a thought,
> > -jay
> > _______________________________________________
> > Foundation mailing list
> > Foundation at lists.openstack.org
> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
> > This email may include confidential information. If you received it in error, please delete it.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Foundation mailing list
> > Foundation at lists.openstack.org
> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Foundation mailing list
> Foundation at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation/attachments/20120104/c18ac343/attachment.html>


jan_drake at hotmail

Jan 4, 2012, 5:18 PM

Post #9 of 26 (867 views)
Permalink
OpenStack Mission & Goals [In reply to]

So, no messages since October. Rumor has it the effort is dead or indefinitely delayed... what's the deal?


Jan


> From: jan_drake at hotmail.com
> Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 09:18:46 -0700
> To: sandy.walsh at RACKSPACE.COM
> CC: foundation at lists.openstack.org
> Subject: Re: [OpenStack Foundation] OpenStack Mission & Goals
>
> +1
>
>
>
>
> On Oct 20, 2011, at 9:49 AM, Sandy Walsh <sandy.walsh at RACKSPACE.COM> wrote:
>
> > +1
> >
> > How can you decide if you want to join a foundation if you don't know what it stands for?
> >
> > -S
> >
> >
> > ----
> > I think a discussion about what OpenStack is and isn't should
> > definitely be had before the Foundation is set up. Otherwise, I
> > imagine people will view the Foundation as being some sort of Wild
> > West land grab, where companies are trying to shape what OpenStack is
> > by fiat or by trying to buy control.
> >
> > Just a thought,
> > -jay
> > _______________________________________________
> > Foundation mailing list
> > Foundation at lists.openstack.org
> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
> > This email may include confidential information. If you received it in error, please delete it.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Foundation mailing list
> > Foundation at lists.openstack.org
> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Foundation mailing list
> Foundation at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation/attachments/20120104/c8cf39b3/attachment.html>


Cole.Crawford at nebula

Jan 4, 2012, 5:19 PM

Post #10 of 26 (867 views)
Permalink
OpenStack Mission & Goals [In reply to]

Hey Jan!

Hope that's not the case. That would be a sad day for Openstack!!

From: Jan Drake <jan_drake [at] hotmail<mailto:jan_drake [at] hotmail>>
Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2012 16:18:04 -0800
To: <sandy.walsh at rackspace.com<mailto:sandy.walsh at rackspace.com>>
Cc: <foundation at lists.openstack.org<mailto:foundation at lists.openstack.org>>, <openstack at lists.launchpad.net<mailto:openstack at lists.launchpad.net>>
Subject: Re: [OpenStack Foundation] OpenStack Mission & Goals



So, no messages since October. Rumor has it the effort is dead or indefinitely delayed... what's the deal?


Jan


> From: jan_drake at hotmail.com<mailto:jan_drake at hotmail.com>
> Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 09:18:46 -0700
> To: sandy.walsh at RACKSPACE.COM<mailto:sandy.walsh at RACKSPACE.COM>
> CC: foundation at lists.openstack.org<mailto:foundation at lists.openstack.org>
> Subject: Re: [OpenStack Foundation] OpenStack Mission & Goals
>
> +1
>
>
>
>
> On Oct 20, 2011, at 9:49 AM, Sandy Walsh <sandy.walsh at RACKSPACE.COM<mailto:sandy.walsh at RACKSPACE.COM>> wrote:
>
> > +1
> >
> > How can you decide if you want to join a foundation if you don't know what it stands for?
> >
> > -S
> >
> >
> > ----
> > I think a discussion about what OpenStack is and isn't should
> > definitely be had before the Foundation is set up. Otherwise, I
> > imagine people will view the Foundation as being some sort of Wild
> > West land grab, where companies are trying to shape what OpenStack is
> > by fiat or by trying to buy control.
> >
> > Just a thought,
> > -jay
> > _______________________________________________
> > Foundation mailing list
> > Foundation at lists.openstack.org<mailto:Foundation at lists.openstack.org>
> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
> > This email may include confidential information. If you received it in error, please delete it.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Foundation mailing list
> > Foundation at lists.openstack.org<mailto:Foundation at lists.openstack.org>
> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Foundation mailing list
> Foundation at lists.openstack.org<mailto:Foundation at lists.openstack.org>
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
_______________________________________________ Foundation mailing list Foundation at lists.openstack.org<mailto:Foundation at lists.openstack.org> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation/attachments/20120105/5718df9b/attachment.html>


rick at openstack

Jan 4, 2012, 5:25 PM

Post #11 of 26 (864 views)
Permalink
OpenStack Mission & Goals [In reply to]

I think some community pressure is in order. After the initial PR bump
of the announcement, perhaps the pressure is a bit low. I really hope
that this is more than a PR.

I have been surprised how many people think a foundation already exists.

Perhaps we can make some suggestions.

I suggest that as of the next election cycle, all of the PPB is elected,
including the Chair.



On 01/04/2012 06:19 PM, Cole Crawford wrote:
> Hey Jan!
>
> Hope that's not the case. That would be a sad day for Openstack!!
>
> From: Jan Drake <jan_drake at hotmail.com<mailto:jan_drake at hotmail.com>>
> Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2012 16:18:04 -0800
> To: <sandy.walsh at rackspace.com<mailto:sandy.walsh at rackspace.com>>
> Cc: <foundation at lists.openstack.org<mailto:foundation at lists.openstack.org>>, <openstack at lists.launchpad.net<mailto:openstack at lists.launchpad.net>>
> Subject: Re: [OpenStack Foundation] OpenStack Mission & Goals
>
>
>
> So, no messages since October. Rumor has it the effort is dead or indefinitely delayed... what's the deal?
>
>
> Jan
>
>
>> From: jan_drake at hotmail.com<mailto:jan_drake at hotmail.com>
>> Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 09:18:46 -0700
>> To: sandy.walsh at RACKSPACE.COM<mailto:sandy.walsh at RACKSPACE.COM>
>> CC: foundation at lists.openstack.org<mailto:foundation at lists.openstack.org>
>> Subject: Re: [OpenStack Foundation] OpenStack Mission & Goals
>>
>> +1
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Oct 20, 2011, at 9:49 AM, Sandy Walsh <sandy.walsh at RACKSPACE.COM<mailto:sandy.walsh at RACKSPACE.COM>> wrote:
>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> How can you decide if you want to join a foundation if you don't know what it stands for?
>>>
>>> -S
>>>
>>>
>>> ----
>>> I think a discussion about what OpenStack is and isn't should
>>> definitely be had before the Foundation is set up. Otherwise, I
>>> imagine people will view the Foundation as being some sort of Wild
>>> West land grab, where companies are trying to shape what OpenStack is
>>> by fiat or by trying to buy control.
>>>
>>> Just a thought,
>>> -jay
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Foundation mailing list
>>> Foundation at lists.openstack.org<mailto:Foundation at lists.openstack.org>
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>>> This email may include confidential information. If you received it in error, please delete it.
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Foundation mailing list
>>> Foundation at lists.openstack.org<mailto:Foundation at lists.openstack.org>
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Foundation mailing list
>> Foundation at lists.openstack.org<mailto:Foundation at lists.openstack.org>
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
> _______________________________________________ Foundation mailing list Foundation at lists.openstack.org<mailto:Foundation at lists.openstack.org> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Foundation mailing list
> Foundation at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 262 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation/attachments/20120104/67776460/attachment.pgp>


otaku at gface

Jan 4, 2012, 5:29 PM

Post #12 of 26 (863 views)
Permalink
OpenStack Mission & Goals [In reply to]

From the last mail-cycle my impression was that it wasn't even clear as
who could join and on what premises.
Didn't monitor the webpages though...

On 01/05/2012 01:25 AM, Rick Clark wrote:
> I think some community pressure is in order. After the initial PR bump
> of the announcement, perhaps the pressure is a bit low. I really hope
> that this is more than a PR.
>
> I have been surprised how many people think a foundation already exists.
>
> Perhaps we can make some suggestions.
>
> I suggest that as of the next election cycle, all of the PPB is elected,
> including the Chair.
>
>
>
> On 01/04/2012 06:19 PM, Cole Crawford wrote:
>
>> Hey Jan!
>>
>> Hope that's not the case. That would be a sad day for Openstack!!
>>
>> From: Jan Drake<jan_drake at hotmail.com<mailto:jan_drake at hotmail.com>>
>> Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2012 16:18:04 -0800
>> To:<sandy.walsh at rackspace.com<mailto:sandy.walsh at rackspace.com>>
>> Cc:<foundation at lists.openstack.org<mailto:foundation at lists.openstack.org>>,<openstack at lists.launchpad.net<mailto:openstack at lists.launchpad.net>>
>> Subject: Re: [OpenStack Foundation] OpenStack Mission& Goals
>>
>>
>>
>> So, no messages since October. Rumor has it the effort is dead or indefinitely delayed... what's the deal?
>>
>>
>> Jan
>>
>>
>>
>>> From: jan_drake at hotmail.com<mailto:jan_drake at hotmail.com>
>>> Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 09:18:46 -0700
>>> To: sandy.walsh at RACKSPACE.COM<mailto:sandy.walsh at RACKSPACE.COM>
>>> CC: foundation at lists.openstack.org<mailto:foundation at lists.openstack.org>
>>> Subject: Re: [OpenStack Foundation] OpenStack Mission& Goals
>>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Oct 20, 2011, at 9:49 AM, Sandy Walsh<sandy.walsh at RACKSPACE.COM<mailto:sandy.walsh at RACKSPACE.COM>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> +1
>>>>
>>>> How can you decide if you want to join a foundation if you don't know what it stands for?
>>>>
>>>> -S
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ----
>>>> I think a discussion about what OpenStack is and isn't should
>>>> definitely be had before the Foundation is set up. Otherwise, I
>>>> imagine people will view the Foundation as being some sort of Wild
>>>> West land grab, where companies are trying to shape what OpenStack is
>>>> by fiat or by trying to buy control.
>>>>
>>>> Just a thought,
>>>> -jay
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Foundation mailing list
>>>> Foundation at lists.openstack.org<mailto:Foundation at lists.openstack.org>
>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>>>> This email may include confidential information. If you received it in error, please delete it.
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Foundation mailing list
>>>> Foundation at lists.openstack.org<mailto:Foundation at lists.openstack.org>
>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>>>>
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Foundation mailing list
>>> Foundation at lists.openstack.org<mailto:Foundation at lists.openstack.org>
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>>>
>> _______________________________________________ Foundation mailing list Foundation at lists.openstack.org<mailto:Foundation at lists.openstack.org> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Foundation mailing list
>> Foundation at lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Foundation mailing list
> Foundation at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>


rbergero at redhat

Jan 4, 2012, 5:35 PM

Post #13 of 26 (863 views)
Permalink
OpenStack Mission & Goals [In reply to]

On 01/04/2012 05:29 PM, michael hempel wrote:
> From the last mail-cycle my impression was that it wasn't even clear
> as who could join and on what premises.
> Didn't monitor the webpages though...
I think it was mostly a matter of people waiting for those types of
answers (what can we do? what is allowed? who is going to tell us what
is kosher?)... and sometimes, in these situations, it's best for the
people who are interested to forge ahead and start exploring/testing the
boundaries without asking someone to draw those lines for them. Asking
for forgiveness rather than begging for permission, etc. :)

And as Rick said, without any pressure from the community, the priority
level drops dramatically. If people really want it, noise gets
attention, generally.

-robyn
>
> On 01/05/2012 01:25 AM, Rick Clark wrote:
>> I think some community pressure is in order. After the initial PR bump
>> of the announcement, perhaps the pressure is a bit low. I really hope
>> that this is more than a PR.
>>
>> I have been surprised how many people think a foundation already exists.
>>
>> Perhaps we can make some suggestions.
>>
>> I suggest that as of the next election cycle, all of the PPB is elected,
>> including the Chair.
>>
>>
>>
>> On 01/04/2012 06:19 PM, Cole Crawford wrote:
>>> Hey Jan!
>>>
>>> Hope that's not the case. That would be a sad day for Openstack!!
>>>
>>> From: Jan Drake<jan_drake at hotmail.com<mailto:jan_drake at hotmail.com>>
>>> Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2012 16:18:04 -0800
>>> To:<sandy.walsh at rackspace.com<mailto:sandy.walsh at rackspace.com>>
>>> Cc:<foundation at lists.openstack.org<mailto:foundation at lists.openstack.org>>,<openstack at lists.launchpad.net<mailto:openstack at lists.launchpad.net>>
>>>
>>> Subject: Re: [OpenStack Foundation] OpenStack Mission& Goals
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> So, no messages since October. Rumor has it the effort is dead or
>>> indefinitely delayed... what's the deal?
>>>
>>>
>>> Jan
>>>
>>>
>>>> From: jan_drake at hotmail.com<mailto:jan_drake at hotmail.com>
>>>> Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 09:18:46 -0700
>>>> To: sandy.walsh at RACKSPACE.COM<mailto:sandy.walsh at RACKSPACE.COM>
>>>> CC:
>>>> foundation at lists.openstack.org<mailto:foundation at lists.openstack.org>
>>>> Subject: Re: [OpenStack Foundation] OpenStack Mission& Goals
>>>>
>>>> +1
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Oct 20, 2011, at 9:49 AM, Sandy
>>>> Walsh<sandy.walsh at RACKSPACE.COM<mailto:sandy.walsh at RACKSPACE.COM>>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> +1
>>>>>
>>>>> How can you decide if you want to join a foundation if you don't
>>>>> know what it stands for?
>>>>>
>>>>> -S
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ----
>>>>> I think a discussion about what OpenStack is and isn't should
>>>>> definitely be had before the Foundation is set up. Otherwise, I
>>>>> imagine people will view the Foundation as being some sort of Wild
>>>>> West land grab, where companies are trying to shape what OpenStack is
>>>>> by fiat or by trying to buy control.
>>>>>
>>>>> Just a thought,
>>>>> -jay
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Foundation mailing list
>>>>> Foundation at lists.openstack.org<mailto:Foundation at lists.openstack.org>
>>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>>>>> This email may include confidential information. If you received
>>>>> it in error, please delete it.
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Foundation mailing list
>>>>> Foundation at lists.openstack.org<mailto:Foundation at lists.openstack.org>
>>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Foundation mailing list
>>>> Foundation at lists.openstack.org<mailto:Foundation at lists.openstack.org>
>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>>> _______________________________________________ Foundation mailing
>>> list
>>> Foundation at lists.openstack.org<mailto:Foundation at lists.openstack.org>
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Foundation mailing list
>>> Foundation at lists.openstack.org
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Foundation mailing list
>> Foundation at lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>
> _______________________________________________
> Foundation mailing list
> Foundation at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation


joshua at pistoncloud

Jan 4, 2012, 6:02 PM

Post #14 of 26 (866 views)
Permalink
OpenStack Mission & Goals [In reply to]

Rick, in the last round of discussions with the other appointed members, we had agreed to give up appointed positions and run for election once the foundation was set up, but the plan for the next election was voted and approved at yesterday's PPB meeting, and only includes the 5 PTL seats and (I believe) 2 community positions. There's still a lot of open discussion regarding whether there are two separate boards or a single, unified board, and whether some baseline of participation / sponsorship / etc. is required to participate in each of those boards.

I would, again, suggest the same structure for participation that I championed for the FITS discussions - a maximum of two representatives from each commercial entity participating in these discussions, to keep the playing field relatively level. (Obviously anyone who's working on OpenStack as a volunteer, or involved as an end-user, would be encouraged to get involved as well).


--
Joshua McKenty, CEO
Piston Cloud Computing, Inc.
w: (650) 24-CLOUD
m: (650) 283-6846
http://www.pistoncloud.com

"Oh, Westley, we'll never survive!"
"Nonsense. You're only saying that because no one ever has."



On 2012-01-04, at 4:25 PM, Rick Clark wrote:

> I think some community pressure is in order. After the initial PR bump
> of the announcement, perhaps the pressure is a bit low. I really hope
> that this is more than a PR.
>
> I have been surprised how many people think a foundation already exists.
>
> Perhaps we can make some suggestions.
>
> I suggest that as of the next election cycle, all of the PPB is elected,
> including the Chair.
>
>
>
> On 01/04/2012 06:19 PM, Cole Crawford wrote:
>> Hey Jan!
>>
>> Hope that's not the case. That would be a sad day for Openstack!!
>>
>> From: Jan Drake <jan_drake at hotmail.com<mailto:jan_drake at hotmail.com>>
>> Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2012 16:18:04 -0800
>> To: <sandy.walsh at rackspace.com<mailto:sandy.walsh at rackspace.com>>
>> Cc: <foundation at lists.openstack.org<mailto:foundation at lists.openstack.org>>, <openstack at lists.launchpad.net<mailto:openstack at lists.launchpad.net>>
>> Subject: Re: [OpenStack Foundation] OpenStack Mission & Goals
>>
>>
>>
>> So, no messages since October. Rumor has it the effort is dead or indefinitely delayed... what's the deal?
>>
>>
>> Jan
>>
>>
>>> From: jan_drake at hotmail.com<mailto:jan_drake at hotmail.com>
>>> Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 09:18:46 -0700
>>> To: sandy.walsh at RACKSPACE.COM<mailto:sandy.walsh at RACKSPACE.COM>
>>> CC: foundation at lists.openstack.org<mailto:foundation at lists.openstack.org>
>>> Subject: Re: [OpenStack Foundation] OpenStack Mission & Goals
>>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Oct 20, 2011, at 9:49 AM, Sandy Walsh <sandy.walsh at RACKSPACE.COM<mailto:sandy.walsh at RACKSPACE.COM>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> +1
>>>>
>>>> How can you decide if you want to join a foundation if you don't know what it stands for?
>>>>
>>>> -S
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ----
>>>> I think a discussion about what OpenStack is and isn't should
>>>> definitely be had before the Foundation is set up. Otherwise, I
>>>> imagine people will view the Foundation as being some sort of Wild
>>>> West land grab, where companies are trying to shape what OpenStack is
>>>> by fiat or by trying to buy control.
>>>>
>>>> Just a thought,
>>>> -jay
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Foundation mailing list
>>>> Foundation at lists.openstack.org<mailto:Foundation at lists.openstack.org>
>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>>>> This email may include confidential information. If you received it in error, please delete it.
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Foundation mailing list
>>>> Foundation at lists.openstack.org<mailto:Foundation at lists.openstack.org>
>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Foundation mailing list
>>> Foundation at lists.openstack.org<mailto:Foundation at lists.openstack.org>
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>> _______________________________________________ Foundation mailing list Foundation at lists.openstack.org<mailto:Foundation at lists.openstack.org> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Foundation mailing list
>> Foundation at lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Foundation mailing list
> Foundation at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation/attachments/20120104/ab7fad8e/attachment.html>


jonathan at openstack

Jan 4, 2012, 9:11 PM

Post #15 of 26 (869 views)
Permalink
OpenStack Mission & Goals [In reply to]

To adapt Mark Twain, rumors of the death of the foundation are greatly exaggerated. = ) I hadn't actually heard that rumor yet and don't know where it would be coming from, so thanks for bringing it up so we can address.

First of all, the foundation is definitely not dead or indefinitely delayed. Sorry for not communicating the status better on the list. There's been a lot of response, and we've been trying to coordinate input from a number of sources. We've also been researching the technical details of what we need to make it happen. At the same time we have not had enough resources to dedicate to it up to this point. To correct that, we've got some additional people, including Mark Collier whom many of you know, working on it as of the beginning of this year to make the foundation happen.

We also realized we needed to take the initial round of feedback and produce something for people to respond to, tear apart, cheer for, make better. We've tried to take the the feedback from a variety of forums--the session at the design summit, the initial burst of discussion on the list, the input from of in-person meetings and people who have reached out to us directly--and formulate a set of documents to guide the discussion. The first two are a draft mission document for the foundation and a draft of the foundation's organization structure. The mission document is very close to being ready to publish. We will be posting it on the wiki in the next few days. The structure document is still going through revisions but will follow shortly. Following the structure document, we'll get into the process of drafting the actual legal documents for the foundation. We will be linking all of these off the Governance section of the wiki and publishing them for feedback on the list as well as reaching back out to the other community members we've talked to.

So what can you do? Once the documents are posted, we really want feedback from everyone on them. As they're posted and we get feedback, we'll refine them and post final versions on the website. In the meantime, also continue to discuss whatever points you feel are important on the mailing list. We're reading everything and incorporating what's talked about.

And anyone can always reach out to me or Mark directly if you have questions or comments. Thanks,

Jonathan.



On Jan 4, 2012, at 6:14 PM, Jan Drake wrote:

> So, no messages since October. Rumor has it the effort is dead or indefinitely delayed... what's the deal?
>
>
> Jan
>
>
> > From: jan_drake at hotmail.com
> > Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 09:18:46 -0700
> > To: sandy.walsh at RACKSPACE.COM
> > CC: foundation at lists.openstack.org
> > Subject: Re: [OpenStack Foundation] OpenStack Mission & Goals
> >
> > +1
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Oct 20, 2011, at 9:49 AM, Sandy Walsh <sandy.walsh at RACKSPACE.COM> wrote:
> >
> > > +1
> > >
> > > How can you decide if you want to join a foundation if you don't know what it stands for?
> > >
> > > -S
> > >
> > >
> > > ----
> > > I think a discussion about what OpenStack is and isn't should
> > > definitely be had before the Foundation is set up. Otherwise, I
> > > imagine people will view the Foundation as being some sort of Wild
> > > West land grab, where companies are trying to shape what OpenStack is
> > > by fiat or by trying to buy control.
> > >
> > > Just a thought,
> > > -jay
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Foundation mailing list
> > > Foundation at lists.openstack.org
> > > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
> > > This email may include confidential information. If you received it in error, please delete it.
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Foundation mailing list
> > > Foundation at lists.openstack.org
> > > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Foundation mailing list
> > Foundation at lists.openstack.org
> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
> _______________________________________________
> Foundation mailing list
> Foundation at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation/attachments/20120104/d3c86464/attachment.html>


jan_drake at hotmail

Jan 4, 2012, 9:48 PM

Post #16 of 26 (865 views)
Permalink
OpenStack Mission & Goals [In reply to]

Added the general list because this needs awareness.

I think the idea that commuity pressure should be required is bullshit. That's a weakness of the leaders of the community. They don't get off the hook because the community isn't yammering at them... otherwise we'd vote on every damned thing (maybe we should rather than having "elected" leaders?). A commitment to open discussion and discourse that doesnt get followed through by the leaders whom commit to it is essentially a betrayal to the community. No different than being elected to congress and ignoring the promises to the people and the fact you're in the position with the responsibility to help all of them.

When it is a private organization committing to transition to a foundation and there is no accountability or transparency it is tragically reminiscent of third world regimes alleging their transition to democracy.

So, what's the truth, oh transitional leaders? Where's the schedule? Where's the "open communication and community involvement"?



Jan


On Jan 4, 2012, at 7:25 PM, Rick Clark <rick at openstack.org> wrote:

> I think some community pressure is in order. After the initial PR bump
> of the announcement, perhaps the pressure is a bit low. I really hope
> that this is more than a PR.
>
> I have been surprised how many people think a foundation already exists.
>
> Perhaps we can make some suggestions.
>
> I suggest that as of the next election cycle, all of the PPB is elected,
> including the Chair.
>
>
>
> On 01/04/2012 06:19 PM, Cole Crawford wrote:
>> Hey Jan!
>>
>> Hope that's not the case. That would be a sad day for Openstack!!
>>
>> From: Jan Drake <jan_drake at hotmail.com<mailto:jan_drake at hotmail.com>>
>> Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2012 16:18:04 -0800
>> To: <sandy.walsh at rackspace.com<mailto:sandy.walsh at rackspace.com>>
>> Cc: <foundation at lists.openstack.org<mailto:foundation at lists.openstack.org>>, <openstack at lists.launchpad.net<mailto:openstack at lists.launchpad.net>>
>> Subject: Re: [OpenStack Foundation] OpenStack Mission & Goals
>>
>>
>>
>> So, no messages since October. Rumor has it the effort is dead or indefinitely delayed... what's the deal?
>>
>>
>> Jan
>>
>>
>>> From: jan_drake at hotmail.com<mailto:jan_drake at hotmail.com>
>>> Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 09:18:46 -0700
>>> To: sandy.walsh at RACKSPACE.COM<mailto:sandy.walsh at RACKSPACE.COM>
>>> CC: foundation at lists.openstack.org<mailto:foundation at lists.openstack.org>
>>> Subject: Re: [OpenStack Foundation] OpenStack Mission & Goals
>>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Oct 20, 2011, at 9:49 AM, Sandy Walsh <sandy.walsh at RACKSPACE.COM<mailto:sandy.walsh at RACKSPACE.COM>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> +1
>>>>
>>>> How can you decide if you want to join a foundation if you don't know what it stands for?
>>>>
>>>> -S
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ----
>>>> I think a discussion about what OpenStack is and isn't should
>>>> definitely be had before the Foundation is set up. Otherwise, I
>>>> imagine people will view the Foundation as being some sort of Wild
>>>> West land grab, where companies are trying to shape what OpenStack is
>>>> by fiat or by trying to buy control.
>>>>
>>>> Just a thought,
>>>> -jay
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Foundation mailing list
>>>> Foundation at lists.openstack.org<mailto:Foundation at lists.openstack.org>
>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>>>> This email may include confidential information. If you received it in error, please delete it.
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Foundation mailing list
>>>> Foundation at lists.openstack.org<mailto:Foundation at lists.openstack.org>
>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Foundation mailing list
>>> Foundation at lists.openstack.org<mailto:Foundation at lists.openstack.org>
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>> _______________________________________________ Foundation mailing list Foundation at lists.openstack.org<mailto:Foundation at lists.openstack.org> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Foundation mailing list
>> Foundation at lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>
>


Cole.Crawford at nebula

Jan 4, 2012, 10:12 PM

Post #17 of 26 (864 views)
Permalink
OpenStack Mission & Goals [In reply to]

Comments in line

On 1/4/12 8:48 PM, "Jan Drake" <jan_drake at hotmail.com> wrote:

>Added the general list because this needs awareness.
>
>I think the idea that commuity pressure should be required is bullshit.
>That's a weakness of the leaders of the community. They don't get off
>the hook because the community isn't yammering at them... otherwise we'd
>vote on every damned thing (maybe we should rather than having "elected"
>leaders?).

Outside looking in one could easily agree with you though I know, working
with 2 Foundations, that sometimes due diligence is required and in the
case of Rackspace I know that the legal and community implications for
doing this wrong would not be good for anyone.



>A commitment to open discussion and discourse that doesnt get followed
>through by the leaders whom commit to it is essentially a betrayal to
>the community. No different than being elected to congress and ignoring
>the promises to the people and the fact you're in the position with the
>responsibility to help all of them.

Totally agree here and using your analogy open source is the democratic
equivalent and we have the power to speak up and push for change.



>When it is a private organization committing to transition to a
>foundation and there is no accountability or transparency it is
>tragically reminiscent of third world regimes alleging their transition
>to democracy.
>
>So, what's the truth, oh transitional leaders? Where's the schedule?
>Where's the "open communication and community involvement"?
>
>
>
>Jan

After reading Jonathan's response I think it's prudent to see what Mark et
all are preparing to release.

Jonathan, I do remember something being said about forums and a wiki being
stood up for the foundation. A lot of people on this list choose to just
get the weekly digest so I'd imagine a more real time communication medium
is leveraged for responses.

Cole

>
>
>On Jan 4, 2012, at 7:25 PM, Rick Clark <rick at openstack.org> wrote:
>
>> I think some community pressure is in order. After the initial PR bump
>> of the announcement, perhaps the pressure is a bit low. I really hope
>> that this is more than a PR.
>>
>> I have been surprised how many people think a foundation already exists.
>>
>> Perhaps we can make some suggestions.
>>
>> I suggest that as of the next election cycle, all of the PPB is elected,
>> including the Chair.
>>
>>
>>
>> On 01/04/2012 06:19 PM, Cole Crawford wrote:
>>> Hey Jan!
>>>
>>> Hope that's not the case. That would be a sad day for Openstack!!
>>>
>>> From: Jan Drake <jan_drake at hotmail.com<mailto:jan_drake at hotmail.com>>
>>> Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2012 16:18:04 -0800
>>> To: <sandy.walsh at rackspace.com<mailto:sandy.walsh at rackspace.com>>
>>> Cc:
>>><foundation at lists.openstack.org<mailto:foundation at lists.openstack.org>>,
>>> <openstack at lists.launchpad.net<mailto:openstack at lists.launchpad.net>>
>>> Subject: Re: [OpenStack Foundation] OpenStack Mission & Goals
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> So, no messages since October. Rumor has it the effort is dead or
>>>indefinitely delayed... what's the deal?
>>>
>>>
>>> Jan
>>>
>>>
>>>> From: jan_drake at hotmail.com<mailto:jan_drake at hotmail.com>
>>>> Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 09:18:46 -0700
>>>> To: sandy.walsh at RACKSPACE.COM<mailto:sandy.walsh at RACKSPACE.COM>
>>>> CC:
>>>>foundation at lists.openstack.org<mailto:foundation at lists.openstack.org>
>>>> Subject: Re: [OpenStack Foundation] OpenStack Mission & Goals
>>>>
>>>> +1
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Oct 20, 2011, at 9:49 AM, Sandy Walsh
>>>><sandy.walsh at RACKSPACE.COM<mailto:sandy.walsh at RACKSPACE.COM>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> +1
>>>>>
>>>>> How can you decide if you want to join a foundation if you don't
>>>>>know what it stands for?
>>>>>
>>>>> -S
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ----
>>>>> I think a discussion about what OpenStack is and isn't should
>>>>> definitely be had before the Foundation is set up. Otherwise, I
>>>>> imagine people will view the Foundation as being some sort of Wild
>>>>> West land grab, where companies are trying to shape what OpenStack is
>>>>> by fiat or by trying to buy control.
>>>>>
>>>>> Just a thought,
>>>>> -jay
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Foundation mailing list
>>>>> Foundation at lists.openstack.org<mailto:Foundation at lists.openstack.org>
>>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>>>>> This email may include confidential information. If you received it
>>>>>in error, please delete it.
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Foundation mailing list
>>>>> Foundation at lists.openstack.org<mailto:Foundation at lists.openstack.org>
>>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Foundation mailing list
>>>> Foundation at lists.openstack.org<mailto:Foundation at lists.openstack.org>
>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>>> _______________________________________________ Foundation mailing
>>>list
>>>Foundation at lists.openstack.org<mailto:Foundation at lists.openstack.org>
>>>http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Foundation mailing list
>>> Foundation at lists.openstack.org
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>>
>>
>
>


thierry at openstack

Jan 5, 2012, 2:40 AM

Post #18 of 26 (867 views)
Permalink
OpenStack Mission & Goals [In reply to]

Joshua McKenty wrote:
> Rick, in the last round of discussions with the other appointed members,
> we had agreed to give up appointed positions and run for election once
> the foundation was set up, but the plan for the next election was voted
> and approved at yesterday's PPB meeting, and only includes the 5 PTL
> seats and (I believe) 2 community positions.

The PPB essentially decided on dates and election officials. The PPB
actually doesn't have the power to decide that Rackspace would give up
its appointed seats rights.

So Rackspace could totally decide, while waiting for the Foundation to
be set up, to give up its appointed seats and have 6 community-elected
positions rather than 2. Four of them would be elected for 12 months and
two of them only for 6 months (so that we reelect 5 members in Fall if
the foundation is still not set up then).

The governance says "As OpenStack grows, the structure of elected and
appointed seats will be recalibrated". Now might be a good time to make
an incremental improvement to the Governance, while waiting for the
Foundation.

--
Thierry Carrez (ttx)


soren at linux2go

Jan 5, 2012, 4:23 AM

Post #19 of 26 (867 views)
Permalink
OpenStack Mission & Goals [In reply to]

2012/1/5 Jonathan Bryce <jonathan at openstack.org>:
> To adapt Mark Twain, rumors of the death of the foundation are greatly
> exaggerated. = ) ?I hadn't actually heard that rumor yet and don't know
> where it would be coming from, so thanks for bringing it up so we can
> address.

The only e-mail on this list from anyone in a position to say anything
with any amount of authority is one from Mark from almost three months
ago:

http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation/2011-October/000016.html

I don't think we can blame anyone for thinking the effort is moribund,
if not actually dead an buried.

> So what can you do? Once the documents are posted, we really want
> feedback from everyone on them. As they're posted and we get feedback,
> we'll refine them and post final versions on the website.

I really don't understand this process at all.

If all these documents are written by Rackspace after receiving feedback
and maybe revising the documents based on said feedback, I predict
they'll have an incredibly short life span.

Presumably, once established, the foundation will be able to change any
and all parts of its constitution, right? If so, why does all of this
need to come out of closed group at Rackspace to begin with, if the
first order of business for the newly elected foundation is to go
through the mission statements, etc. and adjust them according to what
*everyone* in the community wants them to be?

Can't we just define the basic, *initial* structure of the foundation
and have an election? Something like:

This is the OpenStack foundation. There's a board. The board has 9
members. The board's job is define the structure and mission of the
OpenStack foundation before June 1st 2012. Anyone can be elected
for the board. Every individual who has contributed to OpenStack can
vote.

..and then have the election.

The only thing worse than over-engineering something is over-engineering
something that will be discarded the second it's implemented.

--
Soren Hansen ? ? ? ?| http://linux2go.dk/
Ubuntu Developer ? ?| http://www.ubuntu.com/
OpenStack Developer | http://www.openstack.org/


rick at openstack

Jan 5, 2012, 7:44 AM

Post #20 of 26 (864 views)
Permalink
OpenStack Mission & Goals [In reply to]

No offense Jonathan, but this seems like meaningless fluff. Does
Rackspace have anyone dedicated to this fulltime? The lack of
leadership on this is apparent. If this was important, appropriate
dedicated resources would be assigned to it. As it is, it appears to be
a stalling tactic.

Rackspace has become a smaller and smaller percentage of the Openstack
universe. It is unreasonable that it should control the foundation
process. Especially if they are going to take months between updates and
have no visible community participation.

Rackspace needs to hand the process over to a provisional community
group that will pursue a foundation with vigor.

Rick Clark

On 01/04/2012 10:11 PM, Jonathan Bryce wrote:
> To adapt Mark Twain, rumors of the death of the foundation are greatly exaggerated. = ) I hadn't actually heard that rumor yet and don't know where it would be coming from, so thanks for bringing it up so we can address.
>
> First of all, the foundation is definitely not dead or indefinitely delayed. Sorry for not communicating the status better on the list. There's been a lot of response, and we've been trying to coordinate input from a number of sources. We've also been researching the technical details of what we need to make it happen. At the same time we have not had enough resources to dedicate to it up to this point. To correct that, we've got some additional people, including Mark Collier whom many of you know, working on it as of the beginning of this year to make the foundation happen.
>
> We also realized we needed to take the initial round of feedback and produce something for people to respond to, tear apart, cheer for, make better. We've tried to take the the feedback from a variety of forums--the session at the design summit, the initial burst of discussion on the list, the input from of in-person meetings and people who have reached out to us directly--and formulate a set of documents to guide the discussion. The first two are a draft mission document for the foundation and a draft of the foundation's organization structure. The mission document is very close to being ready to publish. We will be posting it on the wiki in the next few days. The structure document is still going through revisions but will follow shortly. Following the structure document, we'll get into the process of drafting the actual legal documents for the foundation. We will be linking all of these off the Governance section of the wiki and publishing them for feedback on the list a
s well as reaching back out to the other community members we've talked to.
>
> So what can you do? Once the documents are posted, we really want feedback from everyone on them. As they're posted and we get feedback, we'll refine them and post final versions on the website. In the meantime, also continue to discuss whatever points you feel are important on the mailing list. We're reading everything and incorporating what's talked about.
>
> And anyone can always reach out to me or Mark directly if you have questions or comments. Thanks,
>
> Jonathan.
>
>
>
> On Jan 4, 2012, at 6:14 PM, Jan Drake wrote:
>
>> So, no messages since October. Rumor has it the effort is dead or indefinitely delayed... what's the deal?
>>
>>
>> Jan
>>
>>
>>> From: jan_drake at hotmail.com
>>> Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 09:18:46 -0700
>>> To: sandy.walsh at RACKSPACE.COM
>>> CC: foundation at lists.openstack.org
>>> Subject: Re: [OpenStack Foundation] OpenStack Mission & Goals
>>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Oct 20, 2011, at 9:49 AM, Sandy Walsh <sandy.walsh at RACKSPACE.COM> wrote:
>>>
>>>> +1
>>>>
>>>> How can you decide if you want to join a foundation if you don't know what it stands for?
>>>>
>>>> -S
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ----
>>>> I think a discussion about what OpenStack is and isn't should
>>>> definitely be had before the Foundation is set up. Otherwise, I
>>>> imagine people will view the Foundation as being some sort of Wild
>>>> West land grab, where companies are trying to shape what OpenStack is
>>>> by fiat or by trying to buy control.
>>>>
>>>> Just a thought,
>>>> -jay
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Foundation mailing list
>>>> Foundation at lists.openstack.org
>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>>>> This email may include confidential information. If you received it in error, please delete it.
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Foundation mailing list
>>>> Foundation at lists.openstack.org
>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Foundation mailing list
>>> Foundation at lists.openstack.org
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>> _______________________________________________
>> Foundation mailing list
>> Foundation at lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Foundation mailing list
> Foundation at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 262 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation/attachments/20120105/a7eebff7/attachment.pgp>


lloydostack at gmail

Jan 5, 2012, 9:57 AM

Post #21 of 26 (865 views)
Permalink
OpenStack Mission & Goals [In reply to]

Having?played a very minor role in this process for WordPress, and
been an onlooking numerous times, it is always a long and involved
process.

Ever try telling the IRS that you don't want to pay taxes?


I appreciate the passion of this discussion, but some of it feels ad
hominem and non-constructive.


As the process continues to proceeds, who is currently blocked by
what, so we can rally around the pragmatic causes?


I can't grow without light,
Lloyd


acs at parvuscaptus

Jan 5, 2012, 10:32 AM

Post #22 of 26 (865 views)
Permalink
OpenStack Mission & Goals [In reply to]

+1

On Thu, Jan 5, 2012 at 11:57 AM, Lloyd Dewolf <lloydostack at gmail.com> wrote:

> Having played a very minor role in this process for WordPress, and
> been an onlooking numerous times, it is always a long and involved
> process.
>
> Ever try telling the IRS that you don't want to pay taxes?
>
>
> I appreciate the passion of this discussion, but some of it feels ad
> hominem and non-constructive.
>
>
> As the process continues to proceeds, who is currently blocked by
> what, so we can rally around the pragmatic causes?
>
>
> I can't grow without light,
> Lloyd
> _______________________________________________
> Foundation mailing list
> Foundation at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation/attachments/20120105/36e7492d/attachment.html>


Ewan.Mellor at eu

Jan 5, 2012, 11:03 PM

Post #23 of 26 (867 views)
Permalink
OpenStack Mission & Goals [In reply to]

> From: foundation-bounces at lists.openstack.org [mailto:foundation-bounces at lists.openstack.org] On Behalf Of Soren Hansen
>
> Can't we just define the basic, *initial* structure of the foundation
> and have an election? Something like:
>
> This is the OpenStack foundation. There's a board. The board has 9
> members. The board's job is define the structure and mission of the
> OpenStack foundation before June 1st 2012. Anyone can be elected
> for the board. Every individual who has contributed to OpenStack can
> vote.
>
> ..and then have the election.

No, we can't just do that.

If you want the foundation to be able to pay the salaries of critical project staff, or you want it to be able to repeat the conferences that we all enjoyed last year, or even more importantly if you want it to be able to defend itself when the patent trolls come knocking, then it needs money. That means that it needs to be legally founded, and I'm not talking about a checking account with a couple of signatures on it. If you're expecting multinationals across the spectrum from the US to Japan to be able to throw money into a pot, then you need to have a properly chartered organization around it.

If you want to stop that pot of money getting taxed before you've spent it, then you need an international, non-profit organization. Unsurprisingly, you can't just set one of those up with six sentences in an email.

You need to do all of that very carefully if you're not going accidentally exclude NASA or other government or academic institutions, either in the US or internationally.

And probably most critically, Rackspace is a publicly traded company, with a board of directors and shareholders, and legal responsibilities towards them. With all the will in the world, Jon Bryce, Jim Curry, Lew Moorman nor anyone else could hand over the OpenStack assets to an organization that isn't well founded with a well defined mission and an internationally recognized legal framework. Not unless you want to start 2012 fighting a shareholder lawsuit, that is.


I'm very happy to see conversations about the foundation. It's great that everyone in the community is keen to see this get done, and it's great that Jim, Mark, and Jon have recognized that they need to keep people up to date a bit more often. Let's not pretend that this is easy though, and that all we've been missing so far has been six insightful sentences. The Rackspace management team need our support and constructive involvement, because what they're doing is *hard*. Let's give them a break.

Ewan.


soren at linux2go

Jan 6, 2012, 3:11 AM

Post #24 of 26 (868 views)
Permalink
OpenStack Mission & Goals [In reply to]

2012/1/6 Ewan Mellor <Ewan.Mellor at eu.citrix.com>:
> From: foundation-bounces at lists.openstack.org
> [mailto:foundation-bounces at lists.openstack.org] On Behalf Of Soren
> Hansen
>> Can't we just define the basic, *initial* structure of the foundation
>> and have an election? Something like:
>>
>> ? ? This is the OpenStack foundation. ?There's a board. The board has 9
>> ? ? members. The board's job is define the structure and mission of the
>> ? ? OpenStack foundation before June 1st 2012. ?Anyone can be elected
>> ? ? for the board. Every individual who has contributed to OpenStack can
>> ? ? vote.
>>
>> ..and then have the election.
> No, we can't just do that.
>
> If you want the foundation to be able to pay the salaries of critical
> project staff, or you want it to be able to repeat the conferences
> that we all enjoyed last year, or even more importantly if you want it
> to be able to defend itself when the patent trolls come knocking, then
> it needs money.

Sure.

> That means that it needs to be legally founded, and I'm not talking
> about a checking account with a couple of signatures on it. ?If you're
> expecting multinationals across the spectrum from the US to Japan to
> be able to throw money into a pot, then you need to have a properly
> chartered organization around it.
>
> If you want to stop that pot of money getting taxed before you've
> spent it, then you need an international, non-profit organization.
> Unsurprisingly, you can't just set one of those up with six sentences
> in an email.

I think you're missing my point.

Every time the process has been explained, it's gone something like "RAX
will publish some drafts, will accept feedback, and eventually the final
documents will be published". That's not a democratic process. What if
the feedback isn't unanimous? Noone has even suggested that any of this
will be put to a vote (neither the full documents, nor individual points
of contention), and if so, who would get to vote, etc.. No matter how
good the intentions are inside of RAX, the best way for the community to
accept the end result is for the community to own the process.

My point is that as soon as the foundation is established, all these
things might be rewritten completely anyways, so instead of spending a
lot of internal RAX resources on writing documents that has a very short
expected lifespan, I suggest we elect what is essentially a working
group that will do the same work.

Of course there needs to be legal frameworks in place, and regardless of
whether this is a process driven entirely by RAX or a process driven by
a community working group, it will need signoff by lawyers. That's only
natural when forming a legal entity. I just don't see why that means
that the process can't be community driven.

Would it make you happier if my proposal had said "This is the working
group who is tasked with capturing the mission and establising the
structure of a future OpenStack foundation."? It's insignificant to the
proposal what this first group is called.

> And probably most critically, Rackspace is a publicly traded company,
> with a board of directors and shareholders, and legal responsibilities
> towards them. ?With all the will in the world, Jon Bryce, Jim Curry,
> Lew Moorman nor anyone else could hand over the OpenStack assets to an
> organization that isn't well founded with a well defined mission and
> an internationally recognized legal framework. ?Not unless you want to
> start 2012 fighting a shareholder lawsuit, that is.

Rackspace doesn't necessarily need to give up these assets as soon as
the working group is established.

> I'm very happy to see conversations about the foundation. ?It's great
> that everyone in the community is keen to see this get done, and it's
> great that Jim, Mark, and Jon have recognized that they need to keep
> people up to date a bit more often.

Maybe it's just me (although I doubt that's the case), but being "kept
up to date a bit more often" just isn't good enough.

> Let's not pretend that this is easy though, and that all we've been
> missing so far has been six insightful sentences.

I've never suggested it's easy. I'm just suggesting that the process is
broken.

> The Rackspace management team need our support and constructive
> involvement, because what they're doing is *hard*. ?Let's give them a
> break.

I'm just trying to save everyone some time.

* The establishment of the foundation will involve an election of some
sort.

* The foundation will be entirely self-governing and will be able to
able change any and all parts of its bylaws/constitution.

(Granted, these are only assumptions, but I sincerely hope they're
correct. If not, it doesn't sound like the sort of foundation everyone
is expecting.)

So an election will take place anyway. Whether we have it now or after
all the documents have been "finalised", shouldn't negatively affect the
time to deliver. Also, if the community disagrees with the documents
that come out of the RAX-driven process, they'll be revised anyway, so
putting it into the hands of the community (in the form of a community
elected provisional board or working group) now also shouldn't
negatively affect the time to deliver the foundation that the community
wants, afaics.

--
Soren Hansen ? ? ? ?| http://linux2go.dk/
Ubuntu Developer ? ?| http://www.ubuntu.com/
OpenStack Developer | http://www.openstack.org/


stefano at openstack

Jan 6, 2012, 12:01 PM

Post #25 of 26 (866 views)
Permalink
OpenStack Mission & Goals [In reply to]

On 01/06/2012 02:11 AM, Soren Hansen wrote:
> Every time the process has been explained, it's gone something like
> "RAX will publish some drafts, will accept feedback, and eventually
> the final documents will be published". That's not a democratic
> process. What if the feedback isn't unanimous?

As Mark and others have said before, OpenStack is a meritocracy and its
community is organized so that it takes decisions based on 'lazy
consensus'. I believe there is a strong incentive for RAX to accept
feedback while setting up the foundation: can you imagine the project
remaining as successful as it is now if RAX runs it by itself, without
HP, Dell, Cisco, Nebula, Piston and the like? That would defeat the
whole purpose of setting up a foundation.

What reason do you see for RAX not to build consensus among the community?

> No matter how good the intentions are inside of RAX, the best way for
> the community to accept the end result is for the community to own the
> process. My point is that as soon as the foundation is established,
> all these things might be rewritten completely anyways,

I don't see why anybody would want to spend time creating a mission, a
structure, charters, rules, infrastructure and start over as soon as the
ink is dry. I would expect quite the contrary, instead: once the
foundation is setup it will have to start operating according to its
mission immediately, without further debate. That's why I believe there
is a strong incentive for RAX to lead this process in the most inclusive
way and with a very wide consensus from the community. I agree with you
and others that the process can be improved. Jim, Jonathan and Mark have
already apologized for not communicating enough to this list and they've
openly published a draft and deadlines for the next milestones.

As a long time and relevant member of this community I understand you
have some ideas of what the documents should look like so here is my
suggestion: write down your proposal, comment on the existing draft and
submit it to this list for discussion. I believe that you and everybody
else on this list have the chance to shape the foundation and make sure
OpenStack becomes the ubiquitous software for IaaS.

/stef

First page Previous page 1 2 Next page Last page  View All OpenStack foundation RSS feed   Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded
 
 


Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads
 
  Web Applications & Managed Hosting Powered by Gossamer Threads Inc.