Open Stack

From: Doug Hellmann 
Excerpts from Russell Bryant's message of 2016-02-01 14:31:01 -0500:
> OpenStack has a mission statement that has held up pretty well for the
> life of the project so far.  That mission statement is:
> 
> > to produce the ubiquitous Open Source Cloud Computing platform that will
> > meet the needs of public and private clouds regardless of size, by being
> > simple to implement and massively scalable.

> A few weeks ago, the TC came up with a proposed updated mission statement.
> 
> http://governance.openstack.org/resolutions/20160106-mission-amendment.html
> 
> That proposal is:
> 
> > to produce the ubiquitous Open Source Cloud Computing platform that enables
> > building interoperable public and private clouds regardless of size, by being
> > simple to implement and massively scalable while serving the cloud users'
> > needs.
> 
> The board discussed this proposal during the board meeting last week.
> This spawned a good discussion.  There was a desire that we continue
> that discussion on the foundation mailing list to incorporate additional
> feedback.
> 
> One suggestion was that changing "that will meet the needs of public and
> private clouds" to "that enables building ... public and private clouds"
> was a downgrade.  The suggestion was to restore the original wording, as
> it sounded like a more firm commitment.
> 
> The second major piece of feedback was that some people wanted to
> somehow incorporate that OpenStack is not limited to a specific set of
> technologies.  Specific talk of bare metal, VMs, and containers were
> brought up as examples, but people wanted to somehow reflect that the
> platform is evolving with major technology trends.
> 
> Rob Esker provided this suggested update which incorporates that feedback:
> 
> > "To produce and progressively evolve the ubiquitous Open Source Cloud
> > Computing platform that meets the needs of public and private clouds
> > regardless of size, by being simple to implement, massively scalable,
> > interoperable, and easy to use.”
> 
> (Note: Rob's proposal didn't include the final comma.  I added it.  Feel
> free to debate the merits of the oxford comma if you wish.)
> 
> If I missed anything or if anyone would like to provide additional
> feedback, please respond on list.

The "and progressively evolve" seems superfluous. That's part of how we
would produce OpenStack, and so I think we can trim the statement a bit
by removing it.

I'm not sure "that meets the needs of public and private clouds"
is targeting the right object, grammatically. Clouds don't need
things. People who deploy, operate, and use clouds need things.

I prefer the "serving the cloud users' needs" phrasing rather than
"easy to use", both because it actually mentions people and because
ease of use is only one of many needs a user may have.

So, I propose:

  To produce the ubiquitous Open Source Cloud Computing platform
  that meets the needs of users and operators of public and private
  clouds of all sizes by being simple to implement, massively
  scalable, and interoperable.


	[Rocky]  I Like Doug's take.  We need users and operators to be the focus or the development.  I'd like to add
	just two words (and here's two options for those words) to Doug's proposal

	Alternative 1:

	  To produce and advance the ubiquitous Open Source Cloud Computing platform
	  that meets the needs of users and operators of public and private
	  clouds of all sizes by being simple to implement, massively
	  scalable, and interoperable.

	Alternative 2:
	  To produce and evolve the ubiquitous Open Source Cloud Computing platform
	  that meets the needs of users and operators of public and private
	  clouds of all sizes by being simple to implement, massively
	  scalable, and interoperable.

If there's strong support for adding "easy to use" to that list
after "by being", I won't object.

Doug

> 
> 
> I'm actually pretty happy with Rob's proposal.  I'd like to hear what
> others think so we can continue moving forward.
> 
> Thanks!
>