settingsLogin | Registersettings

[OpenStack Foundation] Updating the OpenStack Mission Statement

0 votes

OpenStack has a mission statement that has held up pretty well for the
life of the project so far. That mission statement is:

to produce the ubiquitous Open Source Cloud Computing platform that will
meet the needs of public and private clouds regardless of size, by being
simple to implement and massively scalable.

Sometime late last year, a discussion emerged about updating the mission
statement to include some key themes that have become an important focus
of our community.

  • interoperability
  • end users

At the join board + TC meeting at the OpenStack Summit in Tokyo, the two
groups agreed that working on an update seemed reasonable and that we
wanted both groups to agree on those updates.

A few weeks ago, the TC came up with a proposed updated mission statement.

http://governance.openstack.org/resolutions/20160106-mission-amendment.html

That proposal is:

to produce the ubiquitous Open Source Cloud Computing platform that enables
building interoperable public and private clouds regardless of size, by being
simple to implement and massively scalable while serving the cloud users'
needs.

The board discussed this proposal during the board meeting last week.
This spawned a good discussion. There was a desire that we continue
that discussion on the foundation mailing list to incorporate additional
feedback.

One suggestion was that changing "that will meet the needs of public and
private clouds" to "that enables building ... public and private clouds"
was a downgrade. The suggestion was to restore the original wording, as
it sounded like a more firm commitment.

The second major piece of feedback was that some people wanted to
somehow incorporate that OpenStack is not limited to a specific set of
technologies. Specific talk of bare metal, VMs, and containers were
brought up as examples, but people wanted to somehow reflect that the
platform is evolving with major technology trends.

Rob Esker provided this suggested update which incorporates that feedback:

"To produce and progressively evolve the ubiquitous Open Source Cloud
Computing platform that meets the needs of public and private clouds
regardless of size, by being simple to implement, massively scalable,
interoperable, and easy to use.”

(Note: Rob's proposal didn't include the final comma. I added it. Feel
free to debate the merits of the oxford comma if you wish.)

If I missed anything or if anyone would like to provide additional
feedback, please respond on list.

I'm actually pretty happy with Rob's proposal. I'd like to hear what
others think so we can continue moving forward.

Thanks!

--
Russell Bryant


Foundation mailing list
Foundation@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
asked Feb 1, 2016 in openstack-foundation by Russell_Bryant (19,240 points)   2 3 8

50 Responses

0 votes

I think the TC approach of sticking with the general structure of the original* while making substantive additions.

With respect to Rob’s version, I think it hits the mark. I support moving forward with it.

*Disclaimer: I helped write the original mission statement so consider myself biased :)

On Feb 1, 2016, at 1:31 PM, Russell Bryant rbryant@redhat.com wrote:

OpenStack has a mission statement that has held up pretty well for the
life of the project so far. That mission statement is:

to produce the ubiquitous Open Source Cloud Computing platform that will
meet the needs of public and private clouds regardless of size, by being
simple to implement and massively scalable.

Sometime late last year, a discussion emerged about updating the mission
statement to include some key themes that have become an important focus
of our community.

  • interoperability
  • end users

At the join board + TC meeting at the OpenStack Summit in Tokyo, the two
groups agreed that working on an update seemed reasonable and that we
wanted both groups to agree on those updates.

A few weeks ago, the TC came up with a proposed updated mission statement.

http://governance.openstack.org/resolutions/20160106-mission-amendment.html

That proposal is:

to produce the ubiquitous Open Source Cloud Computing platform that enables
building interoperable public and private clouds regardless of size, by being
simple to implement and massively scalable while serving the cloud users'
needs.

The board discussed this proposal during the board meeting last week.
This spawned a good discussion. There was a desire that we continue
that discussion on the foundation mailing list to incorporate additional
feedback.

One suggestion was that changing "that will meet the needs of public and
private clouds" to "that enables building ... public and private clouds"
was a downgrade. The suggestion was to restore the original wording, as
it sounded like a more firm commitment.

The second major piece of feedback was that some people wanted to
somehow incorporate that OpenStack is not limited to a specific set of
technologies. Specific talk of bare metal, VMs, and containers were
brought up as examples, but people wanted to somehow reflect that the
platform is evolving with major technology trends.

Rob Esker provided this suggested update which incorporates that feedback:

"To produce and progressively evolve the ubiquitous Open Source Cloud
Computing platform that meets the needs of public and private clouds
regardless of size, by being simple to implement, massively scalable,
interoperable, and easy to use.”

(Note: Rob's proposal didn't include the final comma. I added it. Feel
free to debate the merits of the oxford comma if you wish.)

If I missed anything or if anyone would like to provide additional
feedback, please respond on list.

I'm actually pretty happy with Rob's proposal. I'd like to hear what
others think so we can continue moving forward.

Thanks!

--
Russell Bryant


Foundation mailing list
Foundation@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation


Foundation mailing list
Foundation@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
responded Feb 1, 2016 by mark_at_openstack.or (1,960 points)   1 3
0 votes

I meant to say… I like the TC approach

On Feb 1, 2016, at 2:41 PM, Mark Collier mark@openstack.org wrote:

I think the TC approach of sticking with the general structure of the original* while making substantive additions.

With respect to Rob’s version, I think it hits the mark. I support moving forward with it.

*Disclaimer: I helped write the original mission statement so consider myself biased :)

On Feb 1, 2016, at 1:31 PM, Russell Bryant rbryant@redhat.com wrote:

OpenStack has a mission statement that has held up pretty well for the
life of the project so far. That mission statement is:

to produce the ubiquitous Open Source Cloud Computing platform that will
meet the needs of public and private clouds regardless of size, by being
simple to implement and massively scalable.

Sometime late last year, a discussion emerged about updating the mission
statement to include some key themes that have become an important focus
of our community.

  • interoperability
  • end users

At the join board + TC meeting at the OpenStack Summit in Tokyo, the two
groups agreed that working on an update seemed reasonable and that we
wanted both groups to agree on those updates.

A few weeks ago, the TC came up with a proposed updated mission statement.

http://governance.openstack.org/resolutions/20160106-mission-amendment.html

That proposal is:

to produce the ubiquitous Open Source Cloud Computing platform that enables
building interoperable public and private clouds regardless of size, by being
simple to implement and massively scalable while serving the cloud users'
needs.

The board discussed this proposal during the board meeting last week.
This spawned a good discussion. There was a desire that we continue
that discussion on the foundation mailing list to incorporate additional
feedback.

One suggestion was that changing "that will meet the needs of public and
private clouds" to "that enables building ... public and private clouds"
was a downgrade. The suggestion was to restore the original wording, as
it sounded like a more firm commitment.

The second major piece of feedback was that some people wanted to
somehow incorporate that OpenStack is not limited to a specific set of
technologies. Specific talk of bare metal, VMs, and containers were
brought up as examples, but people wanted to somehow reflect that the
platform is evolving with major technology trends.

Rob Esker provided this suggested update which incorporates that feedback:

"To produce and progressively evolve the ubiquitous Open Source Cloud
Computing platform that meets the needs of public and private clouds
regardless of size, by being simple to implement, massively scalable,
interoperable, and easy to use.”

(Note: Rob's proposal didn't include the final comma. I added it. Feel
free to debate the merits of the oxford comma if you wish.)

If I missed anything or if anyone would like to provide additional
feedback, please respond on list.

I'm actually pretty happy with Rob's proposal. I'd like to hear what
others think so we can continue moving forward.

Thanks!

--
Russell Bryant


Foundation mailing list
Foundation@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation


Foundation mailing list
Foundation@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation


Foundation mailing list
Foundation@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
responded Feb 1, 2016 by mark_at_openstack.or (1,960 points)   1 3
0 votes

Excerpts from Russell Bryant's message of 2016-02-01 14:31:01 -0500:

OpenStack has a mission statement that has held up pretty well for the
life of the project so far. That mission statement is:

to produce the ubiquitous Open Source Cloud Computing platform that will
meet the needs of public and private clouds regardless of size, by being
simple to implement and massively scalable.

A few weeks ago, the TC came up with a proposed updated mission statement.

http://governance.openstack.org/resolutions/20160106-mission-amendment.html

That proposal is:

to produce the ubiquitous Open Source Cloud Computing platform that enables
building interoperable public and private clouds regardless of size, by being
simple to implement and massively scalable while serving the cloud users'
needs.

The board discussed this proposal during the board meeting last week.
This spawned a good discussion. There was a desire that we continue
that discussion on the foundation mailing list to incorporate additional
feedback.

One suggestion was that changing "that will meet the needs of public and
private clouds" to "that enables building ... public and private clouds"
was a downgrade. The suggestion was to restore the original wording, as
it sounded like a more firm commitment.

The second major piece of feedback was that some people wanted to
somehow incorporate that OpenStack is not limited to a specific set of
technologies. Specific talk of bare metal, VMs, and containers were
brought up as examples, but people wanted to somehow reflect that the
platform is evolving with major technology trends.

Rob Esker provided this suggested update which incorporates that feedback:

"To produce and progressively evolve the ubiquitous Open Source Cloud
Computing platform that meets the needs of public and private clouds
regardless of size, by being simple to implement, massively scalable,
interoperable, and easy to use.”

(Note: Rob's proposal didn't include the final comma. I added it. Feel
free to debate the merits of the oxford comma if you wish.)

If I missed anything or if anyone would like to provide additional
feedback, please respond on list.

The "and progressively evolve" seems superfluous. That's part of how we
would produce OpenStack, and so I think we can trim the statement a bit
by removing it.

I'm not sure "that meets the needs of public and private clouds"
is targeting the right object, grammatically. Clouds don't need
things. People who deploy, operate, and use clouds need things.

I prefer the "serving the cloud users' needs" phrasing rather than
"easy to use", both because it actually mentions people and because
ease of use is only one of many needs a user may have.

So, I propose:

To produce the ubiquitous Open Source Cloud Computing platform
that meets the needs of users and operators of public and private
clouds of all sizes by being simple to implement, massively
scalable, and interoperable.

If there's strong support for adding "easy to use" to that list
after "by being", I won't object.

Doug

I'm actually pretty happy with Rob's proposal. I'd like to hear what
others think so we can continue moving forward.

Thanks!


Foundation mailing list
Foundation@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
responded Feb 1, 2016 by Doug_Hellmann (87,520 points)   3 4 12
0 votes

On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 1:31 PM, Russell Bryant rbryant@redhat.com wrote:
OpenStack has a mission statement that has held up pretty well for the
life of the project so far. That mission statement is:

to produce the ubiquitous Open Source Cloud Computing platform that will
meet the needs of public and private clouds regardless of size, by being
simple to implement and massively scalable.

Sometime late last year, a discussion emerged about updating the mission
statement to include some key themes that have become an important focus
of our community.

  • interoperability
  • end users

At the join board + TC meeting at the OpenStack Summit in Tokyo, the two
groups agreed that working on an update seemed reasonable and that we
wanted both groups to agree on those updates.

A few weeks ago, the TC came up with a proposed updated mission statement.

http://governance.openstack.org/resolutions/20160106-mission-amendment.html

That proposal is:

to produce the ubiquitous Open Source Cloud Computing platform that enables
building interoperable public and private clouds regardless of size, by being
simple to implement and massively scalable while serving the cloud users'
needs.

The board discussed this proposal during the board meeting last week.
This spawned a good discussion. There was a desire that we continue
that discussion on the foundation mailing list to incorporate additional
feedback.

One suggestion was that changing "that will meet the needs of public and
private clouds" to "that enables building ... public and private clouds"
was a downgrade. The suggestion was to restore the original wording, as
it sounded like a more firm commitment.

The second major piece of feedback was that some people wanted to
somehow incorporate that OpenStack is not limited to a specific set of
technologies. Specific talk of bare metal, VMs, and containers were
brought up as examples, but people wanted to somehow reflect that the
platform is evolving with major technology trends.

Rob Esker provided this suggested update which incorporates that feedback:

"To produce and progressively evolve the ubiquitous Open Source Cloud
Computing platform that meets the needs of public and private clouds
regardless of size, by being simple to implement, massively scalable,
interoperable, and easy to use.”

(Note: Rob's proposal didn't include the final comma. I added it. Feel
free to debate the merits of the oxford comma if you wish.)

If I missed anything or if anyone would like to provide additional
feedback, please respond on list.

I'm actually pretty happy with Rob's proposal. I'd like to hear what
others think so we can continue moving forward.

I think Rob's proposal is worded quite well and I like it.

Thanks!

--
Russell Bryant


Foundation mailing list
Foundation@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation


Foundation mailing list
Foundation@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
responded Feb 1, 2016 by Kyle_Mestery (16,960 points)   3 3 7
0 votes

On 02/01/2016 03:50 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote:

The "and progressively evolve" seems superfluous. That's part of how we
would produce OpenStack, and so I think we can trim the statement a bit
by removing it.

My understanding of the discussion was that the main point to add was
"embracing a diversity of technologies", essentially making it clear
that the Big Tent approach is a core part of OpenStack's mission. The
"rapid evolution" part was more along the lines of expressing a desired
outcome of Big Tent.

I tried working "technical diversity" in several different ways, and all
seemed to make the statement obtuse and impenetrable. Better to be clear
and crisp.

I'm not sure "that meets the needs of public and private clouds"
is targeting the right object, grammatically. Clouds don't need
things. People who deploy, operate, and use clouds need things.

I prefer the "serving the cloud users' needs" phrasing rather than
"easy to use", both because it actually mentions people and because
ease of use is only one of many needs a user may have.

So, I propose:

To produce the ubiquitous Open Source Cloud Computing platform
that meets the needs of users and operators of public and private
clouds of all sizes by being simple to implement, massively
scalable, and interoperable.

I like the emphasis on meeting the need of users and operators. I'd pick
this over Rob's draft.

If there's strong support for adding "easy to use" to that list
after "by being", I won't object.

The wording on meeting the needs of users covers that aspect, we can
skip the repetition.

Allison


Foundation mailing list
Foundation@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
responded Feb 1, 2016 by Allison_Randal (1,120 points)   1 2
0 votes

From: Doug Hellmann
Excerpts from Russell Bryant's message of 2016-02-01 14:31:01 -0500:
OpenStack has a mission statement that has held up pretty well for the
life of the project so far. That mission statement is:

to produce the ubiquitous Open Source Cloud Computing platform that will
meet the needs of public and private clouds regardless of size, by being
simple to implement and massively scalable.

A few weeks ago, the TC came up with a proposed updated mission statement.

http://governance.openstack.org/resolutions/20160106-mission-amendment.html

That proposal is:

to produce the ubiquitous Open Source Cloud Computing platform that enables
building interoperable public and private clouds regardless of size, by being
simple to implement and massively scalable while serving the cloud users'
needs.

The board discussed this proposal during the board meeting last week.
This spawned a good discussion. There was a desire that we continue
that discussion on the foundation mailing list to incorporate additional
feedback.

One suggestion was that changing "that will meet the needs of public and
private clouds" to "that enables building ... public and private clouds"
was a downgrade. The suggestion was to restore the original wording, as
it sounded like a more firm commitment.

The second major piece of feedback was that some people wanted to
somehow incorporate that OpenStack is not limited to a specific set of
technologies. Specific talk of bare metal, VMs, and containers were
brought up as examples, but people wanted to somehow reflect that the
platform is evolving with major technology trends.

Rob Esker provided this suggested update which incorporates that feedback:

"To produce and progressively evolve the ubiquitous Open Source Cloud
Computing platform that meets the needs of public and private clouds
regardless of size, by being simple to implement, massively scalable,
interoperable, and easy to use.”

(Note: Rob's proposal didn't include the final comma. I added it. Feel
free to debate the merits of the oxford comma if you wish.)

If I missed anything or if anyone would like to provide additional
feedback, please respond on list.

The "and progressively evolve" seems superfluous. That's part of how we
would produce OpenStack, and so I think we can trim the statement a bit
by removing it.

I'm not sure "that meets the needs of public and private clouds"
is targeting the right object, grammatically. Clouds don't need
things. People who deploy, operate, and use clouds need things.

I prefer the "serving the cloud users' needs" phrasing rather than
"easy to use", both because it actually mentions people and because
ease of use is only one of many needs a user may have.

So, I propose:

To produce the ubiquitous Open Source Cloud Computing platform
that meets the needs of users and operators of public and private
clouds of all sizes by being simple to implement, massively
scalable, and interoperable.

[Rocky]  I Like Doug's take.  We need users and operators to be the focus or the development.  I'd like to add
just two words (and here's two options for those words) to Doug's proposal

Alternative 1:

  To produce and advance the ubiquitous Open Source Cloud Computing platform
  that meets the needs of users and operators of public and private
  clouds of all sizes by being simple to implement, massively
  scalable, and interoperable.

Alternative 2:
  To produce and evolve the ubiquitous Open Source Cloud Computing platform
  that meets the needs of users and operators of public and private
  clouds of all sizes by being simple to implement, massively
  scalable, and interoperable.

If there's strong support for adding "easy to use" to that list
after "by being", I won't object.

Doug

I'm actually pretty happy with Rob's proposal. I'd like to hear what
others think so we can continue moving forward.

Thanks!


Foundation mailing list
Foundation@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
responded Feb 2, 2016 by Rochelle_Grober (7,040 points)   1 3 3
0 votes

Doug Hellmann said on Mon, Feb 01, 2016 at 03:50:25PM -0500:

To produce the ubiquitous Open Source Cloud Computing platform
that meets the needs of users and operators of public and private
clouds of all sizes by being simple to implement, massively
scalable, and interoperable.

I like this wording and don't see a need for any additions. Like Doug, I
consider constant evolution part of software production. We could use
"develop" instead of "produce" as the former is more on-going. It also
has connotations of "software development" however which neglects the
non-software parts of the platform. On balance I'm happy with "produce".

Alexis (lxsli)
--
Nova developer, Hewlett-Packard Limited.
Registered Office: Cain Road, Bracknell, Berkshire RG12 1HN.
Registered Number: 00690597 England
VAT number: GB 314 1496 79


Foundation mailing list
Foundation@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
responded Feb 2, 2016 by lxsli_at_hpe.com (1,640 points)   2
0 votes

On 02/01/2016 04:41 PM, Allison Randal wrote:
On 02/01/2016 03:50 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote:

The "and progressively evolve" seems superfluous. That's part of how we
would produce OpenStack, and so I think we can trim the statement a bit
by removing it.

My understanding of the discussion was that the main point to add was
"embracing a diversity of technologies", essentially making it clear
that the Big Tent approach is a core part of OpenStack's mission. The
"rapid evolution" part was more along the lines of expressing a desired
outcome of Big Tent.

I tried working "technical diversity" in several different ways, and all
seemed to make the statement obtuse and impenetrable. Better to be clear
and crisp.

While the Big Tent is important, I don't think it's actually part of our
mission statement. It's our current form of execution which helps cover
the needs of public / private clouds.

I'm not sure "that meets the needs of public and private clouds"
is targeting the right object, grammatically. Clouds don't need
things. People who deploy, operate, and use clouds need things.

I prefer the "serving the cloud users' needs" phrasing rather than
"easy to use", both because it actually mentions people and because
ease of use is only one of many needs a user may have.

So, I propose:

To produce the ubiquitous Open Source Cloud Computing platform
that meets the needs of users and operators of public and private
clouds of all sizes by being simple to implement, massively
scalable, and interoperable.

+1 this is really good. I think it's important distinction that clouds
don't need anything, but users and operators do.

-Sean

--
Sean Dague
http://dague.net


Foundation mailing list
Foundation@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation

responded Feb 2, 2016 by Sean_Dague (66,200 points)   4 9 16
0 votes

I think the mission below is a good representation of the intent of the collaboration of the community.

One question: What does interoperability refer to? Application interoperability across OpenStack Clouds? The interoperability of OpenStack based Clouds with other Non-OpenStack Clouds? Or ?

Thanks
Carol
-----Original Message-----
From: Sean Dague [mailto:sean@dague.net]
Sent: Tuesday, February 02, 2016 3:06 AM
To: foundation@lists.openstack.org
Subject: Re: [OpenStack Foundation] Updating the OpenStack Mission Statement

On 02/01/2016 04:41 PM, Allison Randal wrote:
On 02/01/2016 03:50 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote:

The "and progressively evolve" seems superfluous. That's part of how
we would produce OpenStack, and so I think we can trim the statement
a bit by removing it.

My understanding of the discussion was that the main point to add was
"embracing a diversity of technologies", essentially making it clear
that the Big Tent approach is a core part of OpenStack's mission. The
"rapid evolution" part was more along the lines of expressing a
desired outcome of Big Tent.

I tried working "technical diversity" in several different ways, and
all seemed to make the statement obtuse and impenetrable. Better to be
clear and crisp.

While the Big Tent is important, I don't think it's actually part of our mission statement. It's our current form of execution which helps cover the needs of public / private clouds.

I'm not sure "that meets the needs of public and private clouds"
is targeting the right object, grammatically. Clouds don't need
things. People who deploy, operate, and use clouds need things.

I prefer the "serving the cloud users' needs" phrasing rather than
"easy to use", both because it actually mentions people and because
ease of use is only one of many needs a user may have.

So, I propose:

To produce the ubiquitous Open Source Cloud Computing platform
that meets the needs of users and operators of public and private
clouds of all sizes by being simple to implement, massively
scalable, and interoperable.

+1 this is really good. I think it's important distinction that clouds
don't need anything, but users and operators do.

-Sean

--
Sean Dague
http://dague.net


Foundation mailing list
Foundation@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
responded Feb 2, 2016 by Barrett,_Carol_L (3,380 points)   2 3
0 votes

Barrett, Carol L wrote:
I think the mission below is a good representation of the intent of the collaboration of the community.

One question: What does interoperability refer to? Application interoperability across OpenStack Clouds? The interoperability of OpenStack based Clouds with other Non-OpenStack Clouds? Or ?

Application interoperability across OpenStack clouds.

The original TC-suggested wording ("building interoperable public and
private clouds") was arguably slightly clearer there.

--
Thierry Carrez (ttx)


Foundation mailing list
Foundation@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
responded Feb 2, 2016 by Thierry_Carrez (57,480 points)   3 8 13
...