Randy Bias wrote: > My understanding from earlier discussions is that it was the purview of > the Foundation directors to determine what was a core project and what > is not.
IMHO it should be a combination of the two. If a given project is not technically advanced enough, or cannot align efficiently with the other projects, or can't follow our release cycle, it should not be a core project, or at least not yet. This technical evaluation needs to be done by the Technical Committee, with input from the various technical stakeholders. So it should be more like "accepted by the BoD on recommendation of the TC" or "proposed by the BoD and and accepted or delayed by the TC" at both incubation and core inclusion stages. I have a preference for the first option, since the whole core inclusion track is a very progressive and technical path that starts with engaging very early with the existing technical leaders of the project. -- Thierry Carrez (ttx) Release Manager, OpenStack _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack-poc Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack-poc More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
