[OpenStack Foundation] Updating the OpenStack Mission Statement

Robert Cathey robert at cathey.co
Fri Feb 12 01:05:44 UTC 2016

Mission atatements should be clear, memorable and short. Great ones are
often less than 15 words. TED has a two word mission statement (spreading
ideas). They do not have to be complete sentences.

The statement should set an aspiration. It should be big and challenging.
It should inspire.

"Giving everyone the ability to unleash great ideas through software by
building the best cloud infrastructure platform, together."

On Thursday, February 11, 2016, Kyle MacDonald <kyle.macdonald at gmail.com
<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','kyle.macdonald at gmail.com');>> wrote:

> +1 - A mission statement is really the rallying cry for the organization.
> A rallying cry cannot and should not be superficial.
> On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 4:19 PM, Boris Renski <brenski at mirantis.com>
> wrote:
>> Since we've decide to embark on this journey of changing the mission
>> statement, we better introduce a mission change that can at least be viewed
>> as a credible attempt to help OpenStack in a meaningful way. Alternatively,
>> let's leave it alone. Cosmetic changes we are contemplating to broaden the
>> mission further don't help OpenStack in my opinion.
>> For instance, we all know that the container ecosystems have been
>> spinning their stories in a way that poses a threat to OpenStack. This is
>> also a lot of valid criticism around "all things to all people". There is
>> also AWS has won and OpenStack is just for NFV thing. How can we use this
>> "change of mission exercise" as an opportunity to address at least some of
>> those threats?
>> I want to this mission change to be a wake up call for action. I.e.
>> change it in a way where people will turn their heads and say "ah-ha,
>> OpenStack board sees the problems and changed the mission statement to help
>> address them."
>> I am frustrated that whatever changes we are discussing here boil down to
>> superficial semantic adjustments that won't really move the needle or be
>> noticed.
>> On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 3:43 PM, Allison Randal <allison at lohutok.net>
>> wrote:
>>> On 02/11/2016 06:04 PM, Boris Renski wrote:
>>> > Does anybody share a concern that the current mission statement is a
>>> bit
>>> > too generic and broad?
>>> >
>>> > Once this mission statement is published, I can see headlines
>>> "OpenStack
>>> > will fail because it aims to be all things to all people. Updated
>>> > mission statement confirms it's inevitable doom."
>>> >
>>> > Can we explore options to tighten it up?
>>> The mission of OpenStack is broad, and this draft revision of the
>>> mission statement accurately captures it.
>>> This draft is actually substantially tighter than the current mission
>>> statement, because it clearly restricts key aspects of the desired
>>> outcome.
>>> Allison
>> _______________________________________________
>> Foundation mailing list
>> Foundation at lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
> --
> ----

Sent while mobile.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation/attachments/20160211/505f63a8/attachment.html>

More information about the Foundation mailing list