Open Stack

On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 8:55 AM, Mark McLoughlin <markmc at redhat.com> wrote:
>

>    OpenStack clearly doesn't (yet) have such a dictator (benevolent or
>    otherwise) so I had assumed the foundation board would assume
>    ultimate responsibility for the project, but delegate a lot of it to
>    a PPB or technical steering committee or the PTLs

Terms like "ultimate responsibility" and "delegate" in this context
make me a little uncomfortable.

The foundation's role needs to be protect, promote, and support the
OpenStack community, and otherwise get out of the way of the
participants designing, coding, and creating supplemental. Anything
else is artificial and constraining, and a sure path to forks.

I'm thankful that the current mission statement draft says about the
same thing: "The OpenStack Foundation is an independent body providing
shared resources to help achieve the OpenStack Mission by Protecting,
Empowering, and Promoting OpenStack software and the community around
it, including users, developers and the entire ecosystem."

Reading http://www.linuxfoundation.org/about it's easy to see how the
Linux Foundations work could have influenced the OpenStack mission
draft.


Particularly when it comes to the presented "Responsibilties" for the
OpenStack Mission, I'm hoping in implementation that the development
related responsibilities are loosely coupled to the foundation, or I
maybe I should say roles and elections facilitated by the foundation
-- that the best participants are in each role with transparent
sponsorship directly from member organizations. This is a natural
system.


Best regards,
Lloyd