Last week, the OpenStack DefCore committee rolled up our collective sleeves and got to work in a serious way. We had a in-person meeting with great turn out
with 5 board members, Foundation executives/staff and good community engagement.
TL;DR > We think DefCore deliverables should be dated milestone guidelines instead tightly coupled to release events (see graphic).
DefCore has a single goal expressed from two sides: 1) defining the “what is OpenStack” brand for Vendors and 2) driving interoperability between OpenStack installations. From that perspective, it is not about releases, but about testable stable capabilities. Over time, these changes should be incremental and, most importantly, trail behind new features that are added.
For those reasons, it was becoming confusing for DefCore to focus on an “Icehouse” definition when most of the capabilities listed are “Havana” ones. We also created significant time pressure to get the “Kilo DefCore” out quickly after the release even though there were no “Kilo” specific additions covered.
In the face-to-face, we settled on a more incremental approach. DefCore would regularly post a set of guidelines for approval by the Board. These Guidelines would include the required, deprecated (leaving) and advisory (coming) capabilities required for Vendors to use the mark (see footnote*). As part of defining capabilities, we would update which capabilities were included in each component and which components were required for the OpenStack Platform. They would also include the relevant designated sections. These Guidelines would use the open draft and discussion process that we are in the process of outlining for approval in Vancouver.
Since DefCore Guidelines are simple time based lists of capabilities, the vendors and community can simply reference an approved Guideline using the date of approval (for example DefCore 2015.03) and know exactly what was included. While each Guideline stands alone, it is easy to compare them for incremental changes.
We’ve been getting positive feedback about this change; however, we are still discussing it and appreciate your input and questions. It is very important for us to make DefCore simple and easy. For that, your confused looks and WTF? comments are very helpful.
* footnote: the Foundation manages the OpenStack brand and the process includes multiple facets. The DefCore Guidelines are just one part of the brand process.
Pingback: DefCore Process 9 Point Graphic balances Community, Vendor, Goverance | Rob Hirschfeld
Pingback: DefCore Process 9 Point Graphic balances Community, Vendor, Goverance - GREENSTACK
Pingback: OpenStack DefCore Process Draft Posted for Review [major milestone] | Rob Hirschfeld
Pingback: OpenStack DefCore Process Draft Posted for Review [major milestone] - GREENSTACK
Pingback: OpenStack DefCore Community Review – TWO Sessions April 21 (agenda) | Rob Hirschfeld
Pingback: DefCore Update – slowly taming the Interop hydra. | Rob Hirschfeld