On Tue, 2013-07-09 at 08:41 -0400, Jonathan Bryce wrote: > Any reason for not just calling it "OpenStack Commons"?
Yes - we're very much focused on libraries of shared code. When we used the name "OpenStack Common" previously, people made all sorts of weird assumptions about what could go in there. Cheers, Mark. > Mark McLoughlin <[email protected]> wrote: > > >Hey > > > >The mission statement is what we've been using for a while. The > >"official title" is new. > > > > Official Title: OpenStack Common Libraries > > PTL: Mark McLoughlin <[email protected]> > > Mission Statement: > > To produce a set of python libraries containing infrastructure code > > shared by OpenStack projects. The APIs provided by these libraries > > should be high quality, stable, consistent and generally applicable. > > > >I did consider explicitly mentioning technical debt with something like: > > > > Mission Statement: > > To tackle copy-and-paste technical debt in OpenStack by producing a > > set of python libraries containing infrastructure code shared by > > OpenStack projects. The APIs provided by these libraries should be > > high quality, stable, consistent and generally applicable. > > > >But for wholly new code, that sounds like you need to introduce > >copy-and-paste technical debt before it can be considered in scope for > >Oslo :) > > > >Cheers, > >Mark. > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >OpenStack-dev mailing list > >[email protected] > >http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
