settingsLogin | Registersettings

Re: [openstack-dev] [Kolla] [Fuel] [tc] Looks like Mirantis is getting Fuel CCP (docker/k8s) kicked off

0 votes

Dims,

Given the strong language around partnership between Intel, Mirantis, and
Google in that press release, and the activity in the review queue (2
pages of outstanding reviews) it seems clear to me that the intent is for
this part of Fuel to participate in the big tent. The right thing to do
here is for fuel-ccp to submit their repos to TC oversight by adding them
to the official project list.

Fuel requires a mission change, or it may be perceived that Fuel itself
does not adhere to the Four Opens [1] specifically Open Development and
Open Community.

Regards
-steve

[1] https://github.com/openstack/governance/blob/master/reference/opens.rst

On 7/26/16, 11:15 AM, "Davanum Srinivas" davanum@gmail.com wrote:

And. it's here in OpenStack:

Look for fuel-ccp-* in http://git.openstack.org/cgit/ or the gerrit search
https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+branch:master+project:^openst
ack/fuel-ccp.*

-- Dims

On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 1:53 PM, Fox, Kevin M Kevin.Fox@pnnl.gov wrote:

They are starting their own project.


From: Stephen Hindle [shindle@llnw.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2016 10:35 AM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: [openstack-dev] [Kolla] [Fuel] Looks like Mirantis is getting
Fuel CCP (docker/k8s) kicked off

So just saw this:

http://www.computerweekly.com/blog/Open-Source-Insider/OpenStack-on-Kuber
netes-Mirantis-fuels-Fuel-with-Google-Intel-heat

Wonder if that means we'll get more devs or maybe some prebuilt
containers for Kolla?

--
Stephen Hindle - Senior Systems Engineer
480.807.8189 480.807.8189
www.limelight.com Delivering Faster Better

Join the conversation

at Limelight Connect

--
The information in this message may be confidential. It is intended
solely
for
the addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, any
disclosure,
copying or distribution of the message, or any action or omission taken
by
you
in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful. Please
immediately
contact the sender if you have received this message in error.


_
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe:
OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


_
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe:
OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

--
Davanum Srinivas :: https://twitter.com/dims


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
asked Jul 26, 2016 in openstack-dev by Steven_Dake_(stdake) (24,540 points)   2 10 23
retagged Jan 26, 2017 by admin

111 Responses

0 votes

Steven,

fyi, This was debated in the project-config review:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/335584/

Thanks,
Dims

On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 3:47 PM, Steven Dake (stdake) stdake@cisco.com wrote:
Dims,

Given the strong language around partnership between Intel, Mirantis, and
Google in that press release, and the activity in the review queue (2
pages of outstanding reviews) it seems clear to me that the intent is for
this part of Fuel to participate in the big tent. The right thing to do
here is for fuel-ccp to submit their repos to TC oversight by adding them
to the official project list.

Fuel requires a mission change, or it may be perceived that Fuel itself
does not adhere to the Four Opens [1] specifically Open Development and
Open Community.

Regards
-steve

[1] https://github.com/openstack/governance/blob/master/reference/opens.rst

On 7/26/16, 11:15 AM, "Davanum Srinivas" davanum@gmail.com wrote:

And. it's here in OpenStack:

Look for fuel-ccp-* in http://git.openstack.org/cgit/ or the gerrit search
https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+branch:master+project:^openst
ack/fuel-ccp.*

-- Dims

On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 1:53 PM, Fox, Kevin M Kevin.Fox@pnnl.gov wrote:

They are starting their own project.


From: Stephen Hindle [shindle@llnw.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2016 10:35 AM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: [openstack-dev] [Kolla] [Fuel] Looks like Mirantis is getting
Fuel CCP (docker/k8s) kicked off

So just saw this:

http://www.computerweekly.com/blog/Open-Source-Insider/OpenStack-on-Kuber
netes-Mirantis-fuels-Fuel-with-Google-Intel-heat

Wonder if that means we'll get more devs or maybe some prebuilt
containers for Kolla?

--
Stephen Hindle - Senior Systems Engineer
480.807.8189 480.807.8189
www.limelight.com Delivering Faster Better

Join the conversation

at Limelight Connect

--
The information in this message may be confidential. It is intended
solely
for
the addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, any
disclosure,
copying or distribution of the message, or any action or omission taken
by
you
in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful. Please
immediately
contact the sender if you have received this message in error.


_
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe:
OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


_
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe:
OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

--
Davanum Srinivas :: https://twitter.com/dims


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

--
Davanum Srinivas :: https://twitter.com/dims


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
responded Jul 26, 2016 by Davanum_Srinivas (35,920 points)   2 4 8
0 votes

Dims,

The project-config addition was debated by Andreas before this partnership
in this press release was announced and the full intent of the project was
understood. The argument I see used in the review is that since fuel-ccp
not part of Newton, it doesn't need to be in the projects.yaml file.
Given the intent of the project is obvious (to me) from the press release
to join the big tent, my two requests still apply. At present this
project may be perceived as "flying under the radar" and further not
following the four opens as I already stated.

The two requests were:

  1. Please submit the repositories for projects.yaml TC oversight
  2. Please change Fuel's mission statement to match reality of this
    announcement

Regards
-steve

On 7/26/16, 1:18 PM, "Davanum Srinivas" davanum@gmail.com wrote:

Steven,

fyi, This was debated in the project-config review:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/335584/

Thanks,
Dims

On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 3:47 PM, Steven Dake (stdake) stdake@cisco.com
wrote:

Dims,

Given the strong language around partnership between Intel, Mirantis,
and
Google in that press release, and the activity in the review queue (2
pages of outstanding reviews) it seems clear to me that the intent is
for
this part of Fuel to participate in the big tent. The right thing to do
here is for fuel-ccp to submit their repos to TC oversight by adding
them
to the official project list.

Fuel requires a mission change, or it may be perceived that Fuel itself
does not adhere to the Four Opens [1] specifically Open Development and
Open Community.

Regards
-steve

[1]
https://github.com/openstack/governance/blob/master/reference/opens.rst

On 7/26/16, 11:15 AM, "Davanum Srinivas" davanum@gmail.com wrote:

And. it's here in OpenStack:

Look for fuel-ccp-* in http://git.openstack.org/cgit/ or the gerrit
search
https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+branch:master+project:^open
st
ack/fuel-ccp.*

-- Dims

On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 1:53 PM, Fox, Kevin M Kevin.Fox@pnnl.gov
wrote:

They are starting their own project.


From: Stephen Hindle [shindle@llnw.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2016 10:35 AM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: [openstack-dev] [Kolla] [Fuel] Looks like Mirantis is getting
Fuel CCP (docker/k8s) kicked off

So just saw this:

http://www.computerweekly.com/blog/Open-Source-Insider/OpenStack-on-Kub
er
netes-Mirantis-fuels-Fuel-with-Google-Intel-heat

Wonder if that means we'll get more devs or maybe some prebuilt
containers for Kolla?

--
Stephen Hindle - Senior Systems Engineer
480.807.8189 480.807.8189
www.limelight.com Delivering Faster Better

Join the conversation

at Limelight Connect

--
The information in this message may be confidential. It is intended
solely
for
the addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, any
disclosure,
copying or distribution of the message, or any action or omission
taken
by
you
in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful. Please
immediately
contact the sender if you have received this message in error.


__
_
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe:
OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


__
_
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe:
OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

--
Davanum Srinivas :: https://twitter.com/dims


__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe:
OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


_
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe:
OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

--
Davanum Srinivas :: https://twitter.com/dims


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
responded Jul 26, 2016 by Steven_Dake_(stdake) (24,540 points)   2 10 23
0 votes

On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 08:36:01PM +0000, Steven Dake (stdake) wrote:
Dims,

The project-config addition was debated by Andreas before this partnership
in this press release was announced and the full intent of the project was
understood. The argument I see used in the review is that since fuel-ccp
not part of Newton, it doesn't need to be in the projects.yaml file.
Given the intent of the project is obvious (to me) from the press release
to join the big tent, my two requests still apply. At present this
project may be perceived as "flying under the radar" and further not
following the four opens as I already stated.

I'm confused, what specifically is happening that is against the four
opens? What part of the press release implies big tent in the future?

The two requests were:

  1. Please submit the repositories for projects.yaml TC oversight
  2. Please change Fuel's mission statement to match reality of this
    announcement

Why? The current mission statement is "To streamline and accelerate the
process of deploying, testing and maintaining various configurations of
OpenStack at scale." I don't see why anything about this announcement
doesn't fit into that mission statement.

// jim

Regards
-steve

On 7/26/16, 1:18 PM, "Davanum Srinivas" davanum@gmail.com wrote:

Steven,

fyi, This was debated in the project-config review:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/335584/

Thanks,
Dims

On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 3:47 PM, Steven Dake (stdake) stdake@cisco.com
wrote:

Dims,

Given the strong language around partnership between Intel, Mirantis,
and
Google in that press release, and the activity in the review queue (2
pages of outstanding reviews) it seems clear to me that the intent is
for
this part of Fuel to participate in the big tent. The right thing to do
here is for fuel-ccp to submit their repos to TC oversight by adding
them
to the official project list.

Fuel requires a mission change, or it may be perceived that Fuel itself
does not adhere to the Four Opens [1] specifically Open Development and
Open Community.

Regards
-steve

[1]
https://github.com/openstack/governance/blob/master/reference/opens.rst

On 7/26/16, 11:15 AM, "Davanum Srinivas" davanum@gmail.com wrote:

And. it's here in OpenStack:

Look for fuel-ccp-* in http://git.openstack.org/cgit/ or the gerrit
search
https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+branch:master+project:^open
st
ack/fuel-ccp.*

-- Dims

On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 1:53 PM, Fox, Kevin M Kevin.Fox@pnnl.gov
wrote:

They are starting their own project.


From: Stephen Hindle [shindle@llnw.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2016 10:35 AM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: [openstack-dev] [Kolla] [Fuel] Looks like Mirantis is getting
Fuel CCP (docker/k8s) kicked off

So just saw this:

http://www.computerweekly.com/blog/Open-Source-Insider/OpenStack-on-Kub
er
netes-Mirantis-fuels-Fuel-with-Google-Intel-heat

Wonder if that means we'll get more devs or maybe some prebuilt
containers for Kolla?

--
Stephen Hindle - Senior Systems Engineer
480.807.8189 480.807.8189
www.limelight.com Delivering Faster Better

Join the conversation

at Limelight Connect

--
The information in this message may be confidential. It is intended
solely
for
the addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, any
disclosure,
copying or distribution of the message, or any action or omission
taken
by
you
in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful. Please
immediately
contact the sender if you have received this message in error.


__
_
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe:
OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


__
_
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe:
OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

--
Davanum Srinivas :: https://twitter.com/dims


__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe:
OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


_
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe:
OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

--
Davanum Srinivas :: https://twitter.com/dims


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
responded Jul 26, 2016 by Jim_Rollenhagen (12,800 points)   2 3 3
0 votes

+1


From: Steven Dake (stdake) [stdake@cisco.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2016 12:47 PM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Kolla] [Fuel] [tc] Looks like Mirantis is getting Fuel CCP (docker/k8s) kicked off

Dims,

Given the strong language around partnership between Intel, Mirantis, and
Google in that press release, and the activity in the review queue (2
pages of outstanding reviews) it seems clear to me that the intent is for
this part of Fuel to participate in the big tent. The right thing to do
here is for fuel-ccp to submit their repos to TC oversight by adding them
to the official project list.

Fuel requires a mission change, or it may be perceived that Fuel itself
does not adhere to the Four Opens [1] specifically Open Development and
Open Community.

Regards
-steve

[1] https://github.com/openstack/governance/blob/master/reference/opens.rst

On 7/26/16, 11:15 AM, "Davanum Srinivas" davanum@gmail.com wrote:

And. it's here in OpenStack:

Look for fuel-ccp-* in http://git.openstack.org/cgit/ or the gerrit search
https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+branch:master+project:^openst
ack/fuel-ccp.*

-- Dims

On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 1:53 PM, Fox, Kevin M Kevin.Fox@pnnl.gov wrote:

They are starting their own project.


From: Stephen Hindle [shindle@llnw.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2016 10:35 AM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: [openstack-dev] [Kolla] [Fuel] Looks like Mirantis is getting
Fuel CCP (docker/k8s) kicked off

So just saw this:

http://www.computerweekly.com/blog/Open-Source-Insider/OpenStack-on-Kuber
netes-Mirantis-fuels-Fuel-with-Google-Intel-heat

Wonder if that means we'll get more devs or maybe some prebuilt
containers for Kolla?

--
Stephen Hindle - Senior Systems Engineer
480.807.8189 480.807.8189
www.limelight.com Delivering Faster Better

Join the conversation

at Limelight Connect

--
The information in this message may be confidential. It is intended
solely
for
the addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, any
disclosure,
copying or distribution of the message, or any action or omission taken
by
you
in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful. Please
immediately
contact the sender if you have received this message in error.


_
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe:
OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


_
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe:
OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

--
Davanum Srinivas :: https://twitter.com/dims


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
responded Jul 26, 2016 by Fox,_Kevin_M (29,360 points)   1 3 4
0 votes

On 7/26/16, 2:13 PM, "Jim Rollenhagen" jim@jimrollenhagen.com wrote:

On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 08:36:01PM +0000, Steven Dake (stdake) wrote:
Dims,

The project-config addition was debated by Andreas before this
partnership
in this press release was announced and the full intent of the project
was
understood. The argument I see used in the review is that since
fuel-ccp
not part of Newton, it doesn't need to be in the projects.yaml file.
Given the intent of the project is obvious (to me) from the press
release
to join the big tent, my two requests still apply. At present this
project may be perceived as "flying under the radar" and further not
following the four opens as I already stated.

I'm confused, what specifically is happening that is against the four
opens? What part of the press release implies big tent in the future?

My exact words were proceeded by "may be perceived"

The press release itself implies a big effort with big contributors hence
big tent.

The two requests were:

  1. Please submit the repositories for projects.yaml TC oversight
  2. Please change Fuel's mission statement to match reality of this
    announcement

Why? The current mission statement is "To streamline and accelerate the
process of deploying, testing and maintaining various configurations of
OpenStack at scale." I don't see why anything about this announcement
doesn't fit into that mission statement.

That mission statement doesn't match intent, which is to produce a
kubernetes deployment of openstack. I don't feel "various configurations"
cuts it.

But its really up to the Fuel team, not you or I.

Regards
-steve

// jim

Regards
-steve

On 7/26/16, 1:18 PM, "Davanum Srinivas" davanum@gmail.com wrote:

Steven,

fyi, This was debated in the project-config review:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/335584/

Thanks,
Dims

On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 3:47 PM, Steven Dake (stdake)
stdake@cisco.com
wrote:

Dims,

Given the strong language around partnership between Intel, Mirantis,
and
Google in that press release, and the activity in the review queue (2
pages of outstanding reviews) it seems clear to me that the intent is
for
this part of Fuel to participate in the big tent. The right thing
to do
here is for fuel-ccp to submit their repos to TC oversight by adding
them
to the official project list.

Fuel requires a mission change, or it may be perceived that Fuel
itself
does not adhere to the Four Opens [1] specifically Open Development
and
Open Community.

Regards
-steve

[1]

https://github.com/openstack/governance/blob/master/reference/opens.rst

On 7/26/16, 11:15 AM, "Davanum Srinivas" davanum@gmail.com wrote:

And. it's here in OpenStack:

Look for fuel-ccp-* in http://git.openstack.org/cgit/ or the gerrit
search

https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+branch:master+project:^op
en
st
ack/fuel-ccp.*

-- Dims

On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 1:53 PM, Fox, Kevin M Kevin.Fox@pnnl.gov
wrote:

They are starting their own project.


From: Stephen Hindle [shindle@llnw.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2016 10:35 AM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: [openstack-dev] [Kolla] [Fuel] Looks like Mirantis is
getting
Fuel CCP (docker/k8s) kicked off

So just saw this:

http://www.computerweekly.com/blog/Open-Source-Insider/OpenStack-on-K
ub
er
netes-Mirantis-fuels-Fuel-with-Google-Intel-heat

Wonder if that means we'll get more devs or maybe some prebuilt
containers for Kolla?

--
Stephen Hindle - Senior Systems Engineer
480.807.8189 480.807.8189
www.limelight.com Delivering Faster Better

Join the conversation

at Limelight Connect

--
The information in this message may be confidential. It is
intended
solely
for
the addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, any
disclosure,
copying or distribution of the message, or any action or omission
taken
by
you
in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful. Please
immediately
contact the sender if you have received this message in error.


__
__
_
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe:
OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


__
__
_
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe:
OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

--
Davanum Srinivas :: https://twitter.com/dims


__
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe:
OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


__
_
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe:
OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

--
Davanum Srinivas :: https://twitter.com/dims


__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe:
OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


_
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe:
OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
responded Jul 26, 2016 by Steven_Dake_(stdake) (24,540 points)   2 10 23
0 votes

On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 09:42:10PM +0000, Steven Dake (stdake) wrote:

On 7/26/16, 2:13 PM, "Jim Rollenhagen" jim@jimrollenhagen.com wrote:

On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 08:36:01PM +0000, Steven Dake (stdake) wrote:

Dims,

The project-config addition was debated by Andreas before this
partnership
in this press release was announced and the full intent of the project
was
understood. The argument I see used in the review is that since
fuel-ccp
not part of Newton, it doesn't need to be in the projects.yaml file.
Given the intent of the project is obvious (to me) from the press
release
to join the big tent, my two requests still apply. At present this
project may be perceived as "flying under the radar" and further not
following the four opens as I already stated.

I'm confused, what specifically is happening that is against the four
opens? What part of the press release implies big tent in the future?

My exact words were proceeded by "may be perceived"

Okay, I'm still confused what part of it may be perceived as not
following the four opens.

The press release itself implies a big effort with big contributors hence
big tent.

I guess the big tent means something different to me - that a project is
"one of us" in that they work the same way we do, etc. I don't think
large efforts or large contributor base matter.

The two requests were:

  1. Please submit the repositories for projects.yaml TC oversight
  2. Please change Fuel's mission statement to match reality of this
    announcement

Why? The current mission statement is "To streamline and accelerate the
process of deploying, testing and maintaining various configurations of
OpenStack at scale." I don't see why anything about this announcement
doesn't fit into that mission statement.

That mission statement doesn't match intent, which is to produce a
kubernetes deployment of openstack. I don't feel "various configurations"
cuts it.

Well, it's unclear to me if Fuel is pivoting completely to Kubernetes or
adding it as an option. That said, I suspect that many configurations
will still be a thing, just that everything runs on Kubernetes.

But its really up to the Fuel team, not you or I.

Indeed, mostly just curious as your email was pretty strongly worded and
I didn't really understand it.

// jim

Regards
-steve

// jim

Regards
-steve

On 7/26/16, 1:18 PM, "Davanum Srinivas" davanum@gmail.com wrote:

Steven,

fyi, This was debated in the project-config review:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/335584/

Thanks,
Dims

On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 3:47 PM, Steven Dake (stdake)
stdake@cisco.com
wrote:

Dims,

Given the strong language around partnership between Intel, Mirantis,
and
Google in that press release, and the activity in the review queue (2
pages of outstanding reviews) it seems clear to me that the intent is
for
this part of Fuel to participate in the big tent. The right thing
to do
here is for fuel-ccp to submit their repos to TC oversight by adding
them
to the official project list.

Fuel requires a mission change, or it may be perceived that Fuel
itself
does not adhere to the Four Opens [1] specifically Open Development
and
Open Community.

Regards
-steve

[1]

https://github.com/openstack/governance/blob/master/reference/opens.rst

On 7/26/16, 11:15 AM, "Davanum Srinivas" davanum@gmail.com wrote:

And. it's here in OpenStack:

Look for fuel-ccp-* in http://git.openstack.org/cgit/ or the gerrit
search

https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+branch:master+project:^op
en
st
ack/fuel-ccp.*

-- Dims

On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 1:53 PM, Fox, Kevin M Kevin.Fox@pnnl.gov
wrote:

They are starting their own project.


From: Stephen Hindle [shindle@llnw.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2016 10:35 AM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: [openstack-dev] [Kolla] [Fuel] Looks like Mirantis is
getting
Fuel CCP (docker/k8s) kicked off

So just saw this:

http://www.computerweekly.com/blog/Open-Source-Insider/OpenStack-on-K
ub
er
netes-Mirantis-fuels-Fuel-with-Google-Intel-heat

Wonder if that means we'll get more devs or maybe some prebuilt
containers for Kolla?

--
Stephen Hindle - Senior Systems Engineer
480.807.8189 480.807.8189
www.limelight.com Delivering Faster Better

Join the conversation

at Limelight Connect

--
The information in this message may be confidential. It is
intended
solely
for
the addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, any
disclosure,
copying or distribution of the message, or any action or omission
taken
by
you
in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful. Please
immediately
contact the sender if you have received this message in error.


__
__
_
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe:
OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


__
__
_
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe:
OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

--
Davanum Srinivas :: https://twitter.com/dims


__
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe:
OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


__
_
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe:
OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

--
Davanum Srinivas :: https://twitter.com/dims


__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe:
OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


_
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe:
OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
responded Jul 26, 2016 by Jim_Rollenhagen (12,800 points)   2 3 3
0 votes

Hi Jim,

The issue is, as I see it, a parallel activity to one of the that is currently accepted into the Big Tent, aka Containerized Deployment:
Kolla's mission:
To provide production-ready containers and deployment tools for operating OpenStack clouds.

Fuel's mission:
To streamline and accelerate the process of deploying, testing and maintaining various configurations of OpenStack at scale.

To me, this totally lets both projects work together, fuel providing the bare metal provisioning/kubernetes provisioning, the k8s orchestration to manage pods/deployments/etc, its awesome ui, etc, and using kolla-kubernetes/kolla for the container bits/k8s templates. Otherwise there's a quite a bit duplication of work. This feels in line with fuel trying to reimplement another core openstack project (say, nova)

When fuel-ccp was proposed, it was proposed as more of a proof of concept and not a big tent thing: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/331139/

If you look at contributions to each of kolla-kubernetes its a fairly diverse set of contributors:
http://stackalytics.com/?module=kolla-kubernetes
fuel-ccp doesn't show up in stackalytics but if you check the commit log its very heavily dominated by one company. That's not really open development.

The kolla-kubernetes project was having discussions about how to work with the Fuel team to ensure that their needs were met, when they suddenly stopped talking and spawned a new project. This doesn't feel like working with the community. Our differences didn't feel unsolvable to the point of spawning a new, competing project.

Now its being advertised very openly. This feels like it was snuck in the back door, behind the communities back then pushed hard.

OpenStack is already distressingly fractured already. Can we try and work together rather then keep making an already pretty bad situation worse? Are the technical differences really that far apart to prevent it?

Does that help to clarify the concern?

Thanks,
Kevin


From: Jim Rollenhagen [jim@jimrollenhagen.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2016 3:28 PM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Kolla] [Fuel] [tc] Looks like Mirantis is getting Fuel CCP (docker/k8s) kicked off

On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 09:42:10PM +0000, Steven Dake (stdake) wrote:

On 7/26/16, 2:13 PM, "Jim Rollenhagen" jim@jimrollenhagen.com wrote:

On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 08:36:01PM +0000, Steven Dake (stdake) wrote:

Dims,

The project-config addition was debated by Andreas before this
partnership
in this press release was announced and the full intent of the project
was
understood. The argument I see used in the review is that since
fuel-ccp
not part of Newton, it doesn't need to be in the projects.yaml file.
Given the intent of the project is obvious (to me) from the press
release
to join the big tent, my two requests still apply. At present this
project may be perceived as "flying under the radar" and further not
following the four opens as I already stated.

I'm confused, what specifically is happening that is against the four
opens? What part of the press release implies big tent in the future?

My exact words were proceeded by "may be perceived"

Okay, I'm still confused what part of it may be perceived as not
following the four opens.

The press release itself implies a big effort with big contributors hence
big tent.

I guess the big tent means something different to me - that a project is
"one of us" in that they work the same way we do, etc. I don't think
large efforts or large contributor base matter.

The two requests were:

  1. Please submit the repositories for projects.yaml TC oversight
  2. Please change Fuel's mission statement to match reality of this
    announcement

Why? The current mission statement is "To streamline and accelerate the
process of deploying, testing and maintaining various configurations of
OpenStack at scale." I don't see why anything about this announcement
doesn't fit into that mission statement.

That mission statement doesn't match intent, which is to produce a
kubernetes deployment of openstack. I don't feel "various configurations"
cuts it.

Well, it's unclear to me if Fuel is pivoting completely to Kubernetes or
adding it as an option. That said, I suspect that many configurations
will still be a thing, just that everything runs on Kubernetes.

But its really up to the Fuel team, not you or I.

Indeed, mostly just curious as your email was pretty strongly worded and
I didn't really understand it.

// jim

Regards
-steve

// jim

Regards
-steve

On 7/26/16, 1:18 PM, "Davanum Srinivas" davanum@gmail.com wrote:

Steven,

fyi, This was debated in the project-config review:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/335584/

Thanks,
Dims

On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 3:47 PM, Steven Dake (stdake)
stdake@cisco.com
wrote:

Dims,

Given the strong language around partnership between Intel, Mirantis,
and
Google in that press release, and the activity in the review queue (2
pages of outstanding reviews) it seems clear to me that the intent is
for
this part of Fuel to participate in the big tent. The right thing
to do
here is for fuel-ccp to submit their repos to TC oversight by adding
them
to the official project list.

Fuel requires a mission change, or it may be perceived that Fuel
itself
does not adhere to the Four Opens [1] specifically Open Development
and
Open Community.

Regards
-steve

[1]

https://github.com/openstack/governance/blob/master/reference/opens.rst

On 7/26/16, 11:15 AM, "Davanum Srinivas" davanum@gmail.com wrote:

And. it's here in OpenStack:

Look for fuel-ccp-* in http://git.openstack.org/cgit/ or the gerrit
search

https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+branch:master+project:^op
en
st
ack/fuel-ccp.*

-- Dims

On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 1:53 PM, Fox, Kevin M Kevin.Fox@pnnl.gov
wrote:

They are starting their own project.


From: Stephen Hindle [shindle@llnw.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2016 10:35 AM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: [openstack-dev] [Kolla] [Fuel] Looks like Mirantis is
getting
Fuel CCP (docker/k8s) kicked off

So just saw this:

http://www.computerweekly.com/blog/Open-Source-Insider/OpenStack-on-K
ub
er
netes-Mirantis-fuels-Fuel-with-Google-Intel-heat

Wonder if that means we'll get more devs or maybe some prebuilt
containers for Kolla?

--
Stephen Hindle - Senior Systems Engineer
480.807.8189 480.807.8189
www.limelight.com Delivering Faster Better

Join the conversation

at Limelight Connect

--
The information in this message may be confidential. It is
intended
solely
for
the addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, any
disclosure,
copying or distribution of the message, or any action or omission
taken
by
you
in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful. Please
immediately
contact the sender if you have received this message in error.


__
__
_
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe:
OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


__
__
_
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe:
OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

--
Davanum Srinivas :: https://twitter.com/dims


__
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe:
OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


__
_
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe:
OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

--
Davanum Srinivas :: https://twitter.com/dims


__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe:
OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


_
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe:
OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
responded Jul 26, 2016 by Fox,_Kevin_M (29,360 points)   1 3 4
0 votes

Jim,

Thinking like Kevin's below are the reason I asked for the two requested
changes. He isn't the only person to think along these lines. His
argument is coherent and logical and if you analyze his response he
indicates his perception is the four opens are not being followed by Fuel.

It is the responsibility of every OpenStack community member to protect
the four opens. The four opens are the founding of OpenStack's
fundamental tenants. Even if the reality is Fuel is participating in the
OpenStack community using the four opens, people may not perceive it as
such based upon the many reviews linked in this thread.

As can be seen by Kevin's email, perception matters.

Clearly Mirantis is committed to this effort with two pages of Mirantis
reviews outstanding.

What precisely is the harm in acknowledging the truth directly in the
governance repo?

Regards
-steve

On 7/26/16, 4:44 PM, "Fox, Kevin M" Kevin.Fox@pnnl.gov wrote:

Hi Jim,

The issue is, as I see it, a parallel activity to one of the that is
currently accepted into the Big Tent, aka Containerized Deployment:
Kolla's mission:
To provide production-ready containers and deployment tools for operating
OpenStack clouds.

Fuel's mission:
To streamline and accelerate the process of deploying, testing and
maintaining various configurations of OpenStack at scale.

To me, this totally lets both projects work together, fuel providing the
bare metal provisioning/kubernetes provisioning, the k8s orchestration to
manage pods/deployments/etc, its awesome ui, etc, and using
kolla-kubernetes/kolla for the container bits/k8s templates. Otherwise
there's a quite a bit duplication of work. This feels in line with fuel
trying to reimplement another core openstack project (say, nova)

When fuel-ccp was proposed, it was proposed as more of a proof of concept
and not a big tent thing: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/331139/

If you look at contributions to each of kolla-kubernetes its a fairly
diverse set of contributors:
http://stackalytics.com/?module=kolla-kubernetes
fuel-ccp doesn't show up in stackalytics but if you check the commit log
its very heavily dominated by one company. That's not really open
development.

The kolla-kubernetes project was having discussions about how to work
with the Fuel team to ensure that their needs were met, when they
suddenly stopped talking and spawned a new project. This doesn't feel
like working with the community. Our differences didn't feel unsolvable
to the point of spawning a new, competing project.

Now its being advertised very openly. This feels like it was snuck in the
back door, behind the communities back then pushed hard.

OpenStack is already distressingly fractured already. Can we try and work
together rather then keep making an already pretty bad situation worse?
Are the technical differences really that far apart to prevent it?

Does that help to clarify the concern?

Thanks,
Kevin


From: Jim Rollenhagen [jim@jimrollenhagen.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2016 3:28 PM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Kolla] [Fuel] [tc] Looks like Mirantis is
getting Fuel CCP (docker/k8s) kicked off

On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 09:42:10PM +0000, Steven Dake (stdake) wrote:

On 7/26/16, 2:13 PM, "Jim Rollenhagen" jim@jimrollenhagen.com wrote:

On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 08:36:01PM +0000, Steven Dake (stdake) wrote:

Dims,

The project-config addition was debated by Andreas before this
partnership
in this press release was announced and the full intent of the
project
was
understood. The argument I see used in the review is that since
fuel-ccp
not part of Newton, it doesn't need to be in the projects.yaml file.
Given the intent of the project is obvious (to me) from the press
release
to join the big tent, my two requests still apply. At present this
project may be perceived as "flying under the radar" and further not
following the four opens as I already stated.

I'm confused, what specifically is happening that is against the four
opens? What part of the press release implies big tent in the future?

My exact words were proceeded by "may be perceived"

Okay, I'm still confused what part of it may be perceived as not
following the four opens.

The press release itself implies a big effort with big contributors
hence
big tent.

I guess the big tent means something different to me - that a project is
"one of us" in that they work the same way we do, etc. I don't think
large efforts or large contributor base matter.

The two requests were:

  1. Please submit the repositories for projects.yaml TC oversight
  2. Please change Fuel's mission statement to match reality of this
    announcement

Why? The current mission statement is "To streamline and accelerate the
process of deploying, testing and maintaining various configurations of
OpenStack at scale." I don't see why anything about this announcement
doesn't fit into that mission statement.

That mission statement doesn't match intent, which is to produce a
kubernetes deployment of openstack. I don't feel "various
configurations"
cuts it.

Well, it's unclear to me if Fuel is pivoting completely to Kubernetes or
adding it as an option. That said, I suspect that many configurations
will still be a thing, just that everything runs on Kubernetes.

But its really up to the Fuel team, not you or I.

Indeed, mostly just curious as your email was pretty strongly worded and
I didn't really understand it.

// jim

Regards
-steve

// jim

Regards
-steve

On 7/26/16, 1:18 PM, "Davanum Srinivas" davanum@gmail.com wrote:

Steven,

fyi, This was debated in the project-config review:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/335584/

Thanks,
Dims

On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 3:47 PM, Steven Dake (stdake)
stdake@cisco.com
wrote:

Dims,

Given the strong language around partnership between Intel,
Mirantis,
and
Google in that press release, and the activity in the review
queue (2
pages of outstanding reviews) it seems clear to me that the
intent is
for
this part of Fuel to participate in the big tent. The right thing
to do
here is for fuel-ccp to submit their repos to TC oversight by
adding
them
to the official project list.

Fuel requires a mission change, or it may be perceived that Fuel
itself
does not adhere to the Four Opens [1] specifically Open
Development
and
Open Community.

Regards
-steve

[1]

https://github.com/openstack/governance/blob/master/reference/opens.r
st

On 7/26/16, 11:15 AM, "Davanum Srinivas" davanum@gmail.com
wrote:

And. it's here in OpenStack:

Look for fuel-ccp-* in http://git.openstack.org/cgit/ or the
gerrit
search

https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+branch:master+project:^
op
en
st
ack/fuel-ccp.*

-- Dims

On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 1:53 PM, Fox, Kevin M Kevin.Fox@pnnl.gov
wrote:

They are starting their own project.


From: Stephen Hindle [shindle@llnw.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2016 10:35 AM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: [openstack-dev] [Kolla] [Fuel] Looks like Mirantis is
getting
Fuel CCP (docker/k8s) kicked off

So just saw this:

http://www.computerweekly.com/blog/Open-Source-Insider/OpenStack-on
-K
ub
er
netes-Mirantis-fuels-Fuel-with-Google-Intel-heat

Wonder if that means we'll get more devs or maybe some prebuilt
containers for Kolla?

--
Stephen Hindle - Senior Systems Engineer
480.807.8189 480.807.8189
www.limelight.com Delivering Faster Better

Join the conversation

at Limelight Connect

--
The information in this message may be confidential. It is
intended
solely
for
the addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, any
disclosure,
copying or distribution of the message, or any action or
omission
taken
by
you
in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful. Please
immediately
contact the sender if you have received this message in error.


__
__
__
_
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe:
OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe

http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>


__
__
__
_
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe:
OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe

http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

--
Davanum Srinivas :: https://twitter.com/dims


__
__
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe:
OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


__
__
_
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe:
OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

--
Davanum Srinivas :: https://twitter.com/dims


__
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe:
OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


__
_
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe:
OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe:
OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


_
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe:
OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
responded Jul 27, 2016 by Steven_Dake_(stdake) (24,540 points)   2 10 23
0 votes

On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 4:44 PM, Fox, Kevin M Kevin.Fox@pnnl.gov wrote:

[snip]

The issue is, as I see it, a parallel activity to one of the that is
currently accepted into the Big Tent, aka Containerized Deployment

[snip]

This seems to be the crux of the matter as best as I can tell. Is it true
to say that the concern is that Kolla believes they "own" the containerized
deployment space inside the Big Tent?

Whether to have competing projects in the big tent was debated by the TC at
the time and my recollection is that we decided that was a good thing -- if
someone wanted to develop a Nova replacement, then let them do it in public
with the community. It would either win or lose based on its merits. Why is
this not something which can happen here as well?

I guess I should also point out that there is at least one other big tent
deployment tool deploying containerized openstack components now, so its
not like this idea is unique or new. Perhaps using kubernetes makes it
different somehow, but I don't see it.

Michael

--
Rackspace Australia


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
responded Jul 27, 2016 by Michael_Still (16,180 points)   3 5 13
0 votes

Michael,

Response inline.

From: Michael Still mikal@stillhq.com
Reply-To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Date: Wednesday, July 27, 2016 at 5:30 AM
To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Kolla] [Fuel] [tc] Looks like Mirantis is getting Fuel CCP (docker/k8s) kicked off

On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 4:44 PM, Fox, Kevin M Kevin.Fox@pnnl.gov wrote:

[snip]

The issue is, as I see it, a parallel activity to one of the that is currently accepted into the Big Tent, aka Containerized Deployment

[snip]

This seems to be the crux of the matter as best as I can tell. Is it true to say that the concern is that Kolla believes they "own" the containerized deployment space inside the Big Tent?

I can't give you Kevin's thinking on this, but my thinking is that every project has a right to innovate even if it means competing with an established project. Even if that competition involves a straight up fork or serious copy and paste from the competitive project. These are permitted things in big tent. Kolla has been forked a few times with people seeding competitive projects. The license permits this, and fwiw I don't see any problem with it. There is nothing more appealing to an engineer then forking a code base for whatever reason. Hence I disagree about your assertion that competition is the crux of the matter.

It is easier to copy a successful design then to innovate your own the hard way.

I have already stated where the problem is, and I'll state it once again using C&P:

"
Given the strong language around partnership between Intel, Mirantis, and
Google in that press release, and the activity in the review queue (2
pages of outstanding reviews) it seems clear to me that the intent is for
this part of Fuel to participate in the big tent. The right thing to do
here is for fuel-ccp to submit their repos to TC oversight by adding them
to the official project list.

Fuel requires a mission change, or it may be perceived that Fuel itself
does not adhere to the Four Opens [1] specifically Open Development and
Open Community.
"

[snip]

Michael

--
Rackspace Australia


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
responded Jul 27, 2016 by Steven_Dake_(stdake) (24,540 points)   2 10 23
...