On Mon, 2014-06-09 at 20:14 -0400, Doug Hellmann wrote: > On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 6:11 PM, Eoghan Glynn <egl...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > > >> Based on the discussion I'd like to propose these options: > >> 1. Cinder-certified driver - This is an attempt to move the "certification" > >> to the project level. > >> 2. CI-tested driver - This is probably the most accurate, at least for what > >> we're trying to achieve for Juno: Continuous Integration of Vendor-specific > >> Drivers. > > > > Hi Ramy, > > > > Thanks for these constructive suggestions. > > > > The second option is certainly a very direct and specific reflection of > > what is actually involved in getting the Cinder project's imprimatur. > > I do like "tested." > > I'd like to understand what the foundation is planning for > "certification" as well, to know how big of an issue this really is. > Even if they aren't going to certify drivers, I have heard discussions > around training and possibly other areas so I would hate for us to > introduce confusion by having different uses of that term in similar > contexts. Mark, do you know who is working on that within the board or > foundation?
http://blogs.gnome.org/markmc/2014/05/17/may-11-openstack-foundation-board-meeting/ Boris Renski raised the possibility of the Foundation attaching the trademark to a verified, certified or tested status for drivers. It wasn't discussed at length because board members hadn't been briefed in advance, but I think it's safe to say there was a knee-jerk negative reaction from a number of members. This is in the context of the DriverLog report: http://stackalytics.com/report/driverlog http://www.mirantis.com/blog/cloud-drivers-openstack-driverlog-part-1-solving-driver-problem/ http://www.mirantis.com/blog/openstack-will-open-source-vendor-certifications/ AIUI the "CI tested" phrase was chosen in DriverLog to avoid the controversial area Boris describes in the last link above. I think that makes sense. Claiming this CI testing replaces more traditional certification programs is a sure way to bog potentially useful collaboration down in vendor politics. Avoiding dragging the project into those sort of politics is something I'm really keen on, and why I think the word "certification" is best avoided so we can focus on what we're actually trying to achieve. Mark. _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev