On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 10:02:36PM -0800, Mark Atwood wrote: > On Tue, Feb 24, 2015, at 04:28, Kashyap Chamarthy wrote: > > > > Along with the below, if push comes to shove, OpenStack Foundation could > > probably try a milder variant (obviously, not all activities can be > > categorized as 'critical path') of Linux Foundation's "Critical > > Infrastructure Protection Initiative"[1] to fund certain project > > activities in need. > > Speaking as a person who sits on the LF CII board meetings, > and helps turn the crank on that particular sausage mill, > no, we really don't want to go down that path at this point in > time.
I didn't imply to do an _exact_ version of LF's CII. Given so much of interest in OpenStack, vendors/interested parties must (yes) maintain a balance between giving vs taking from the community. And, they should be provided ample information on _where_ they can target people/engineers (Dan Berrange noted this too in one of his responses in this thread). -- /kashyap __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
