openstack team mailing list archive

[Mark McLoughlin <markmc@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, 2011-12-06 at 10:11 -0800, Duncan McGreggor wrote:
> On 06 Dec 2011 - 14:28, Thierry Carrez wrote:
> > So the general consensus so far on this discussion seems to be:
> >
> > (0) The "2011.3 release" PPA bears false expectations and should be
> > removed now. In the future, we should not provide such PPAs: 0-day
> > packages for the release should be available from the "last milestone"
> > PPA anyway.
> >
> > (1) OpenStack, as an upstream project, should focus on development
> > rather than on providing a production-ready distribution.
> >
> > (2) We could provide "daily builds" from the stable/diablo branch for a
> > variety of releases (much like what we do for the master branch), but
> > those should be clearly marked "not for production use" and be
> > best-effort only (like our master branch builds).
> >
> > (3) This should not prevent a group in the community from working on a
> > project providing an "openstack on Lucid" production-ready distribution
> > if they so wishes. This project would just be another distribution of
> > OpenStack.
> 
> This doesn't seem like enough to me. OpenStack isn't just a library;
> it's a fairly substantial collection of software and services, intended
> to be used as a product. If it can't be used as a product, what's the
> use?
> 
> Someone made the suggestion that a new OpenStack group be started, one
> whose focus is on producing a production-ready, distribution-ready,
> release of the software. So can we add one more (need some help with
> wording, here...):

This paragraph makes it sound like you think OpenStack upstream should
produce production-ready binary packages? This is what we've agreed not
to do, at least until some group of volunteers show that they can
sustain the work involved.

> (4) OpenStack will accept and foster a new project, one that is not
> focused on development, but rather the distribution and it's general
> stability. This distro project will be responsible for advocating on
> behalf of various operating systems/distros/sponsoring vendors for bugs
> that affect performance and stability of OpenStack, or prevent an
> operating system from running OpenStack.

This sounds like you want want OpenStack to focus more on the quality of
its releases. This is generally accepted and you can join the QA team to
help out:

  https://launchpad.net/~openstack-qa-team

It also sounds like you want more co-ordination upstream between
downstream distributions of OpenStack. I think there's already pretty
good co-ordination. Is there any specific problem you've seen on that
front?

Cheers,
Mark.