On Sep 22, 2014, at 3:11 PM, Tim Bell <tim.b...@cern.ch> wrote: > > On 22 Sep 2014, at 20:53, Doug Hellmann <d...@doughellmann.com> wrote: > >> >> On Sep 19, 2014, at 6:29 AM, Thierry Carrez <thie...@openstack.org> wrote: >> >>> Monty Taylor wrote: >>>> I've recently been thinking a lot about Sean's Layers stuff. So I wrote >>>> a blog post which Jim Blair and Devananda were kind enough to help me edit. >>>> >>>> http://inaugust.com/post/108 >>> >>> Hey Monty, >>> >>> As you can imagine, I read that post with great attention. I generally >>> like the concept of a tightly integrated, limited-by-design layer #1 >>> (I'd personally call it "Ring 0") and a large collection of "OpenStack" >>> things gravitating around it. That would at least solve the attraction >>> of the integrated release, suppress the need for incubation, foster >> >> I’m not sure I see this change reducing the number of incubated projects >> unless we no longer incubate and graduate projects at all. Would everything >> just live on stackforge and have a quality designation instead of an >> “officialness” designation? Or would we have both? ATC status seems to imply >> we need some sort of officialness designation, as you mention below. >> > > The quality designation is really important for the operator community who > are trying to work out what we can give to our end users. > > Offering early helps to establish the real-life experience and give good > feedback on the designs. However, the operator then risks leaving their > users orphaned if the project does not get a sustainable following or > significant disruption if the APIs change. > > The packaging teams are key here as well. When do Ubuntu and Red Hat work out > the chain of pre-reqs etc. to produce installable packages, packstack/juju > tool support ? > > We do need to have some way to show that an layer #2 package is ready for > prime time production and associated criteria (packages available, docs > available, >1 company communities, models for HA and scale, …)
Right. I’m trying to understand if we are talking about doing that *instead* of our existing incubation/graduation process, or in addition to that process as a new thing. I like the idea of adding a quality designation. I’m not sure replacing our existing process with that designation is a good idea. Doug > > Tim > > > > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
