Open Stack

On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 9:22 AM, Thierry Carrez <thierry at openstack.org> wrote:
> Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> OpenStack will turn into a business consortium made up of large,
>> well-financed companies, who will determine the course and direction
>> of the so-called "open source projects" and unless you're able to pay
>
> I think you're overestimating the power of the Foundation board of
> directors over the "open source projects". The current proposal sets up
> a separate and independent technical committee, which I'm trying to make
> sure is fully elected on a one contributor = one vote basis. Each
> project is lead by a technical lead that is elected on a one author =
> one vote basis. Those groups very much set the course and direction for
> the projects.
>
> So the technical direction of OpenStack as a whole, and the technical
> direction of each project, is very much *not* pay-to-play. It's
> participate-to-play.
>

Then what does the foundation board get out of it...?

What's wrong with making the tech-cmmt the actual board, and the
proposed foundation board simply "sponsors"?
Or "benefactors"?