The OSF Board of directors is soliciting feedback from representatives of existing confirmed Open Infrastructure Projects (Zuul, OpenStack, and Kata) to evaluate the Airship pilot project's upcoming application for OIP confirmation. This is as per the OSF Project Confirmation Guidelines.
As part of this process, we reached out to OpenStack TC members and the OpenStack community  to gather feedback on interactions observed or experienced (relevant to the guidelines) and requested a compilation of these events in an Etherpad. We have gathered as much feedback as we can due to the unusually short notice this round. The following is a summary of what was provided:
1. Strategic focus
Alignment with the strategic focus areas of the OSF looks strong. Airship makes use of OpenStack components where appropriate. Integration with Ironic for bare metal provisioning is still underway, but has been included in the Airship 2.0 roadmap (through usage of the metal3.io project, which provides Kubernetes-native baremetal management using standalone Ironic).
Open governance for the project has been defined, and is fully respecting the "open community" tenet. Airship chose to define two governance bodies (TC and WC) and it could be clearer which body has oversight on the other on what matter. The governance documentation at https://opendev.org/airship/governancecould be expanded: for example it should probably publish or link to the current TC/WC member lists, as the wiki pages can be a bit hard to find.
3. Technical best practices
Airship has adopted many technical best practices pioneered in the OpenStack community and is in pretty good shape. One point raised is that it's still unclear how devs/users to can report bugs/tasks, and how that's been linked to JIRA. Adding Gerrit support to automatically create hyperlinks to JIRA issues would also help integrating the two tools better.
4. Open collaboration
Airship has been started from day 0 with the "4 opens" philosophy in mind. Despite having strong single-vendor origin, it seems to operate now as a level playing field for everyone to collaborate on an equal footing. Some issues still seem to be assigned on a company basis rather than a per developer basis, but that is rare.
We generally prefer to use free and open source software tools to build our software. Airship has adopted most of the Opendev tooling (including Gerrit andZuul), with the exception of JIRA (which is free to access and allows self signup).
Airship has been a good neighbor for the OpenStack project. Airship contributors are willing to answer Airship-related questions raised on the openstack-discuss ML, thanks to the significant overlap between Airship and OpenStack-Helm leadership and contributors.
Airship code is licensed under an OSI-approved open source license. While documentation is also released under an appropriate license, some raised concerns at the prominent mention of "AT&T Intellectual Property" copyright in the footer of all online documentation, which gives readers the wrong impression.
5. Active engagement
Airship has drastically improved its organizational diversity over the past year. Roughly two-thirds of commits and reviews are coming from AT&T over the past 6 months, compared to 90% a year ago, so this seems to be on a good trend. On the user side, evidence of usage at scale outside of AT&T is still scarce. We hope that the board presentation will shine some light on other key users. On the ecosystem side, adoption by other integrators shows that the technology can fit a variety of use cases.
Foundation mailing list
Thanks for taking the time and thought in forming this thorough feedback.
Foundation mailing list
|Free forum by Nabble||Edit this page|