On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 1:01 PM, gordon chung <g...@live.ca> wrote: > > > On 15/06/17 11:28 AM, Davanum Srinivas wrote: >> The purpose (my 2 cents) is to highlight what projects are under >> governance and those that are not. > > going down the rabbit hole, what does it mean to be under governance? > projects that want to use the openstack brand and were, at the time of > acceptance, supported some subset[1] of: 'open', [DIMS] Yes, > had some testing, [DIMS] Yes > supported keystone, [DIMS] No. It was never mandatory had a human resource? [DIMS] Yes, hopefully a bunch of people work on it i don't really see how this > differs from big tent? [DIMS] Tons of folks confused about "Big-Tent", folks are confusing that label with "projects under governance". seems more like the same but without the > 'big-tent' stigma? [DIMS] Not sure about stigma. The label is useless right now.
> > are we hoping openstack foundation to be a cloud-specific apache > foundation? maybe it already is, and if so, i don't really understand > the additional labeling we're trying to achieve. > > [1] > https://governance.openstack.org/tc/reference/new-projects-requirements.html > > -- > gord > __________________________________________________________________________ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev -- Davanum Srinivas :: https://twitter.com/dims __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev