Ah, I meant foundation (lowercase f) as in the basis on which an IaaS system is built not a management/governance system ala the Apache Foundation or OpenStack Foundation. However I agree that the comparison and points are apropos.
Nate On Aug 10, 2012 9:40 PM, "Eric Windisch" <e...@cloudscaling.com> wrote: > > > On Aug 10, 2012, at 20:49, Nathanael Burton <nathanael.i.bur...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > I personally equate OpenStack to the Linux Kernel. It's the foundation and > core components that, in OpenStack's case, make up an Infrastructure as as > Service (IaaS) system, a "cloud" kernel. We should expect the core > components and APIs to be stable with sane deprecation policies, but > OpenStack shouldn't do everything for everyone. It should facilitate and > provide the stable framework or foundation in which to build production > quality, large scale (and small) public and private IaaS systems. In and of > itself I believe OpenStack is not an IaaS distribution, ala Linux > distributions (Debian, Fedora, RedHat, SuSe, Ubuntu) which take the Linux > kernel and build all the user-space and complementary services that make up > a manageable, secure, monitored system. > > > An even better example might be Apache. They have their own foundation and > have a number of services that get installed to machines, but they don't > have a distribution or any clear deployment solutions. Some of their > applications such as the httpd are just core pieces that get installed to a > single system and multiple services on multiple machines don't communicate, > but others are horizontally scaling solutions with inter-process > communication, such as Hadoop. Whatever the case, they're still not > building a distribution. > > OpenStack in some ways appears to be the kernel on which applications run, > but its applications are just applications. If the question is where the > foundation draws the line at acceptance of projects, it is an interesting > one... as long as there is a foundation, you can't really use Linux as any > sort of example. Instead, if you want to draw parallels to operating > systems, you'll have to look more closely to the BSD systems. > > With BSD, they've coupled the kernels and the distributions. I do not > think this is a model that OpenStack should follow, but I do see a tendency > of some toward this. Instead, I believe the community and the foundation > should move into the direction of Apache. > > If someone wants to create their own independent distribution, they > should, but it shouldn't be part of the project or blessed by the > foundation. Instead, they would follow the steps of Slackware, Debian, and > Gentoo; not the steps taken by FreeBSD. The community already has a number > of emerging proprietary and/or corporate-sponsored distributions, it would > not do the community a favor for the foundation to create its own. > > Regards, > Eric Windisch > (sent from my iPad) >
_______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp