Open Stack

The OSF Board of directors is soliciting feedback from representatives of
existing confirmed Open Infrastructure Projects  (Zuul, OpenStack, and
Kata) to evaluate the Airship pilot project's upcoming application for OIP
confirmation. This is as per the OSF Project Confirmation Guidelines[0].

As part of this process, we reached out to OpenStack TC members and the
OpenStack community [2] to gather feedback on interactions observed or
experienced (relevant to the guidelines) and requested a compilation of
these events in an Etherpad[1]. We have gathered as much feedback as we can
due to the unusually short notice this round. The following is a summary of
what was provided:

*1. Strategic focus*

Alignment with the strategic focus areas of the OSF looks strong. Airship
makes use of OpenStack components where appropriate. Integration with
Ironic for bare metal provisioning is still underway, but has been included
in the Airship 2.0 roadmap (through usage of the metal3.io project, which
provides Kubernetes-native baremetal management using standalone Ironic).

*2. Governance*

Open governance for the project has been defined, and is fully respecting
the "open community" tenet. Airship chose to define two governance bodies
(TC and WC) and it could be clearer which body has oversight on the other
on what matter. The governance documentation at
https://opendev.org/airship/governancecould be expanded: for example it
should probably publish or link to the current TC/WC member lists, as the
wiki pages can be a bit hard to find.

*3. Technical best practices*

Airship has adopted many technical best practices pioneered in the
OpenStack community and is in pretty good shape. One point raised is that
it's still unclear how devs/users to can report bugs/tasks, and how that's
been linked to JIRA. Adding Gerrit support to automatically create
hyperlinks to JIRA issues would also help integrating the two tools better.


*4. Open collaboration*
Airship has been started from day 0 with the "4 opens" philosophy in mind.
Despite having strong single-vendor origin, it seems to operate now as a
level playing field for everyone to collaborate on an equal footing. Some
issues still seem to be assigned on a company basis rather than a per
developer basis, but that is rare.

We generally prefer to use free and open source software tools to build our
software. Airship has adopted most of the Opendev tooling (including Gerrit
andZuul), with the exception of JIRA (which is free to access and allows
self signup).

Airship has been a good neighbor for the OpenStack project. Airship
contributors are willing to answer Airship-related questions raised on the
openstack-discuss ML, thanks to the significant overlap between Airship and
OpenStack-Helm leadership and contributors.

Airship code is licensed under an OSI-approved open source license. While
documentation is also released under an appropriate license, some raised
concerns at the prominent mention of  "AT&T Intellectual Property"
copyright in the footer of all online documentation, which gives readers
the wrong impression.

*5. Active engagement*

Airship has drastically improved its organizational diversity over the past
year. Roughly two-thirds of commits and reviews are coming from AT&T over
the past 6 months, compared to 90% a year ago, so this seems to be on a
good trend. On the user side, evidence of usage at scale outside of AT&T is
still scarce. We hope that the board presentation will shine some light on
other key users. On the ecosystem side, adoption by other integrators shows
that the technology can fit a variety of use cases.

[0]
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/OSFProjectConfirmationGuidelines
[1]
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/openstack-tc-airship-confirmation-feedback
[2]
http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2019-October/010164.html
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation/attachments/20191022/335145f5/attachment.html>