On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 8:22 AM, Thierry Carrez <thie...@openstack.org>wrote:
> (This email is mostly directed to PTLs for programs that include one > integrated project) > > The DefCore subcommittee from the OpenStack board of directors asked the > Technical Committee yesterday about which code sections in each > integrated project should be "designated sections" in the sense of [1] > (code you're actually needed to run or include to be allowed to use the > trademark). That determines where you can run alternate code (think: > substitute your own private hypervisor driver) and still be able to call > the result openstack. > > [1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/CoreDefinition > > PTLs and their teams are obviously the best placed to define this, so it > seems like the process should be: PTLs propose designated sections to > the TC, which blesses them, combines them and forwards the result to the > DefCore committee. We could certainly leverage part of the governance > repo to make sure the lists are kept up to date. > > Comments, thoughts ? > I don't have any issue defining what I think of as typical extension / variation seams in the Glance code base. However, I'm still struggling to understand what all this means for our projects and our ecosystem. Basically, why do I care? What are the implications of a 0% vs 100% designation? Are we hoping to improve interoperability, or encourage more upstream collaboration, or what? How many deployments do we expect to get the trademark after this core definition process is completed? > > -- > Thierry Carrez (ttx) > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
