Open Stack

Hi Rob,

You probably saw that we posted a statement on the blog this weekend. It’s intent was to clarify that the Board has taken no action at this point. Community discussion is great, but we were seeing some confusion about the etherpad from this thread. It is not something the Foundation Board has adopted as a policy, and no Board action has been planned around it.

In my reading, the language Josh drafted simply states the fact that OpenStack is a flexible technology that runs well in multiple environments, Linux-based or otherwise. That’s an important design tenet, however, I’m not sure how the draft language as it stands would be translated to a Foundation "policy" that we would enforce. I talked with Josh, and we actually moved it to a re-labeled wiki page to try to make that clear and get a permanent home for continued community input. We can use the discussion and editing features there to keep iterating on it: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/TechnologyIntegrationPrinciples

Ultimately, users and the competitive marketplace around OpenStack are the forces driving our ecosystem. If a company's commercial decisions are found to create problems for the commitments they've made to the OpenStack Foundation and community, then we'll deal with that. But until that point, the community is the referee. That's how open source works.

Of course, these are just my views, and I'm interested in hearing others as well.

Jonathan


On May 16, 2014, at 12:03 PM, Rob_Hirschfeld at Dell.com wrote:

> Board & Stff,
>  
> I’ve seen (and heard) a lot about this; however, I’m not clear about the follow-up?
>  
> Are we calling a special board meeting (I’d support that) to discuss or is the Foundation crafting a response?
>  
> Rob
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Joshua McKenty [mailto:joshua at pistoncloud.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2014 9:07 AM
> > To: foundation at lists.openstack.org
> > Subject: [OpenStack Foundation] Today's WSJ article
> > 
> > Board members et al,
> > 
> > As usual, I am not a lawyer. However, given the overtones of antitrust 
> > concern in this article, if other board members and/or foundation 
> > staff feel that we should discuss this, I would ask that we schedule a quick board-coffee-meeting.
> > We need to avoid any walking quorums, and we also need to instruct 
> > Jonathan and foundation staff with a clear response. This is not a 
> > topic where I feel it would be appropriate for Alan to represent the board.
> > 
> > Joshua
> > 
> > Sent from my iPhone
> > _______________________________________________
> > Foundation mailing list
> > Foundation at lists.openstack.org
> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>