Open Stack

In some ways, at least to me, the main end-goal is having OpenStack be a
standard and reference implementation, which allows for others to extend
and build upon. The web succeeded because the standard (HTTP) was agreed
upon by all, and a free and open reference implementation,  which was
developed and governed by a neutral community, (Apache httpd) was available.


On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 5:06 AM, Thierry Carrez <thierry at openstack.org>wrote:

> Mark McLoughlin posted a very interesting view at:
>
> http://blogs.gnome.org/markmc/2013/10/30/openstack-core-and-interoperability/
>
> I agree with him. "Core" is not a goal, it's just a means to an end. A
> "market of interoperable OpenStack clouds" is the goal. By focusing on
> the means rather than the end goal, we face the risk of missing the target.
>
> If you focus on the end goal, you realize there is a choice between two
> approaches: the common denominator approach (aim for a small set to make
> sure most current "OpenStack clouds" will stay "OpenStack clouds"), and
> the prescriptive approach (define what would make a "complete" OpenStack
> cloud, and use the power of the trademark to encourage everyone to
> converge towards that). There is no way around that choice and we should
> have the courage to tackle it early rather than late.
>
> I like Rob's approach to the problem because it tries to be neutral and
> technical, however I'm concerned that it defers the hard (and political)
> choice between those approaches, concentrates on the mechanics and hopes
> that those will somehow tell us where the finish line is.
>
> --
> Thierry Carrez (ttx)
>
> _______________________________________________
> Foundation mailing list
> Foundation at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation/attachments/20131031/9f95bab8/attachment.html>