Open Stack

> Yes, I agree. However, I do think that there is already a safety valve
> in there in the board membership cap. Having seen Postgres go to crap
> when all of their core members were employed by EnterpriseDB, I think we
> can safely say that we have learned something about ensuring
> representation is at least spread across different backgrounds. HP and
> Rackspace might have hundreds of foundation members, but they each still
> have a board member cap. Additionally, I might point out, HP and
> Rackspace are the ones running public OpenStack-based clouds at the
> moment ... so they might actually _HAVE_ that many people actually
> working on OpenStack related things. I also don't want to unfairly pick
> on them because they are the ones who have decided to jump all-in on
> this bet.
>

I think that guarantees diversity in the board.  Which is terrific.
But it doesn't eliminate the bias in the membership vote.  These are
two different things.