Open Stack

OK, well I'm glad that I've had the chance to state my affiliation.  In general I hate customers, and the last thing I would ever be fanatical about is support.

I actually think that the optics are pretty good in this case.  Of the 2,500 people who care enough to sign up, over 20% aren't working for the 'big hitters', and 13% aren't even being paid to do this at all.  I think that's a great story for OpenStack, to be honest.

Ewan.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gil Yehuda [mailto:gyehuda at yahoo-inc.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2012 3:10 PM
> To: Ewan Mellor; Anne Gentle; Matt Joyce
> Cc: foundation at lists.openstack.org
> Subject: RE: [OpenStack Foundation] Nomination Process Updates
> 
> Not accusing you at all. I'm just remarking at how the data is neatly
> hidden, to make "affiliated other" appear to be a unit, when we know
> that it is a very diverse collection of others.  This is something that
> data analysts do to hide details.  I'm not suggesting you were doing
> anything malicious. The data can say what we want it to say.  The
> problem here is not "facts" but optics.
> 
> As Stefano said:
> > for what I've seen so far in almost 1 year, OpenStack, as an open
> source software
> > project was never "tightly controlled" by any company.
> 
> And I take him at his word.
> 
> My issue is not that any person did something in violation of the
> rules, or that Rackspace is doing something that will ruin the voting
> process.  My issue is that it looks bad, and they should have
> understood that.  Your manipulation of data (I mean this as non-
> pejorative phrase) demonstrates that data could be displayed in
> multiple ways and is not the same as fact.  I think this was very
> helpful, and not a defense of Rackspace at all.  I'm not accusing you
> or Rackspace of manipulation. I'm suggesting Rackspace should have done
> a better job of reading the play. I saw your revised chart as a clever
> demonstration that this is more about perception than reality -- which
> is how I see it too.
> 
> gil yehuda
> director of open source and standards, Yahoo! Inc.
> gyehuda at yahoo-inc.com | (408) 336-4857
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ewan Mellor [mailto:Ewan.Mellor at eu.citrix.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2012 2:58 PM
> To: Gil Yehuda; Anne Gentle; Matt Joyce
> Cc: foundation at lists.openstack.org
> Subject: RE: [OpenStack Foundation] Nomination Process Updates
> 
> I don't know what you're saying, but it sounds like you're accusing me
> of pro-Rackspace bias.  You do know who I work for, right?
> 
> Ewan.
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Gil Yehuda [mailto:gyehuda at yahoo-inc.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2012 2:18 PM
> > To: Ewan Mellor; Anne Gentle; Matt Joyce
> > Cc: foundation at lists.openstack.org
> > Subject: RE: [OpenStack Foundation] Nomination Process Updates
> >
> > Classic information hiding technique.  I used to be an industry
> > analyst, we learned those tricks too. Viola, the problem has
> magically
> > gone away.
> >
> >
> > gil yehuda
> > director of open source and standards, Yahoo! Inc.
> > gyehuda at yahoo-inc.com | (408) 336-4857
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Ewan Mellor [mailto:Ewan.Mellor at eu.citrix.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2012 2:12 PM
> > To: Anne Gentle; Matt Joyce
> > Cc: foundation at lists.openstack.org
> > Subject: Re: [OpenStack Foundation] Nomination Process Updates
> >
> > Are the numbers even that bad?  After a bit of tweaking on that
> script
> > I make it currently:
> >
> > 31.56% Rackspace
> > 30.25% HP
> > 25.24% Affiliated other
> > 12.95% Non-affiliated
> >
> > Is that too "Fox News" for people?  I don't think so.
> >
> > Ewan.
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Anne Gentle [mailto:anne at openstack.org]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2012 12:22 PM
> > > To: Matt Joyce
> > > Cc: foundation at lists.openstack.org
> > > Subject: Re: [OpenStack Foundation] Nomination Process Updates
> > >
> > > In the spirit of
> > > running-the-code-so-the-rest-of-us-get-more-context,
> > > here's the resulting output when run at 2:10 CST today 8/1/12.
> > >
> > > [(787, u'rackspace'),
> > >  (753, u'hp'),
> > >  (297, u'none'),
> > >  (41, u'cisco'),
> > >  (28, u'canonical'),
> > >  (24, u'dreamhost'),
> > >  (22, u'red hat'),
> > >  (22, u'nebula'),
> > >  (17, u'cloudscaling'),
> > >  (14, u'employee'),
> > >  (13, u'morphlabs'),
> > >  (13, u'emc'),
> > >  (13, u'dell'),
> > >  (10, u'suse'),
> > >  (10, u'piston cloud'),
> > >  (5, u'yahoo'),
> > >  (5, u'ibm'),
> > >  (5, u'at&t'),
> > >  (4, u'tipit'),
> > >  (4, u'opscode')]
> > >
> > > Wanted to be sure non-Python programmers have the information that
> > > results from running the script linked on Github.
> > >
> > > Thanks Jonathan and crew for all the additional info, now I know
> who
> > > to thank for the support.
> > > Anne
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 1:56 PM, Matt Joyce <matt at nycresistor.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > >> For those who are curious, I've pushed up an ugly hack to get
> > > >> some basic stats one membership affiliations here:
> > > >>   https://gist.github.com/3229457
> > > >
> > > > =/  not particularly happy with those numbers.  it's about as
> fair
> > > and
> > > > balanced as fox news.
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Foundation mailing list
> > > > Foundation at lists.openstack.org
> > > > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Foundation mailing list
> > > Foundation at lists.openstack.org
> > > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Foundation mailing list
> > Foundation at lists.openstack.org
> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation