OpenStack Mission & Goals

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
28 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

OpenStack Mission & Goals

Thierry Carrez
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

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

OpenStack Mission & Goals

Jay Pipes
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

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

OpenStack Mission & Goals

Cole Crawford


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

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

OpenStack Mission & Goals

Patrick Pushor
In reply to this post by Jay Pipes
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

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

OpenStack Mission & Goals

Rick Clark
In reply to this post by Jay Pipes
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>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

OpenStack Mission & Goals

Sandy Walsh
In reply to this post by Jay Pipes
+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.


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

OpenStack Mission & Goals

Jan Drake
+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
>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

OpenStack Mission & Goals

Jan Drake

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>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

OpenStack Mission & Goals

Jan Drake









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>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

OpenStack Mission & Goals

Cole Crawford
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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation/attachments/20120105/5718df9b/attachment.html>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

OpenStack Mission & Goals

Rick Clark
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>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

OpenStack Mission & Goals

michael hempel
 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
>    


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

OpenStack Mission & Goals

Robyn Bergeron
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


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

OpenStack Mission & Goals

Joshua McKenty
In reply to this post by Rick Clark
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>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

OpenStack Mission & Goals

Jonathan Bryce
In reply to this post by Jan Drake
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>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

OpenStack Mission & Goals

Jan Drake
In reply to this post by Rick Clark
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
>
>


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

OpenStack Mission & Goals

Cole Crawford
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
>>
>>
>
>



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[Openstack] OpenStack Mission & Goals

Thierry Carrez
In reply to this post by Jan Drake
Jan Drake 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?).  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 For

Cross-posting for those only following the openstack list: please note
that Jonathan Bryce posted the following answer to the foundation list
(the Foundation archives seem to be a bit buggy):

> 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.

As a community member (and PPB elected member), I'm happy to get some
report of progress towards the setting up of the Foundation, and I'm
awaiting the initial posting of the documents so that we can start
giving constructive feedback.

Jan: To be clear, the "transitional leaders" owning the transition
process are not the PPB members -- the governance of OpenStack is still
owned solely by Rackspace. As Jonathan says, the first draft of the
documents are prepared by him and Mark Collier.

Regards,

--
Thierry Carrez (ttx)
Release Manager, OpenStack

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

OpenStack Mission & Goals

Thierry Carrez
In reply to this post by Joshua McKenty
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)

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

OpenStack Mission & Goals

Soren Hansen
In reply to this post by Jonathan Bryce
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/

12