The Josh McKenty comment that OpenStack is “aggressively anti-startup” for Business Insider got me thinking and today’s news about IBM & Cisco acquiring startups Blue Box & Piston made me decide to early release this post.
I think there’s a general confusion about start-ups in OpenStack. Many of the early (and now acquired) start-ups were selling OpenStack the platform. Since OpenStack is community infrastructure, that’s a really hard place to differentiate. Unfortunately, there’s no material install base (yet) to create an ecosystem of start-ups on top of OpenStack.
The real question is not how to make OpenStack start-up friendly, but how to create a thriving system around OpenStack like Amazon and VMware have created.
That said, here’s my list of ten ways that OpenStack could be more start-up friendly:
- Accept companies will have some closed tech – Many investors believe that companies need proprietary IP. An “open all things” company will have more trouble with investors.
- Stop scoring commits as community currency – Small companies don’t show up in the OpenStack committer economy because they are 1) small and 2) working on their product upstream ahead of OpenStack upstream code.
- Have start-up travel assistance – OpenStack demands a lot of travel and start-ups don’t have the funds to chase the world-wide summits and mid-cycles.
- Embrace open projects outside of OpenStack governance – Not all companies want or need that type of governance for their start-up code base. That does not make them less valuable, it just makes them not ready yet.
- Stop anointing ecosystem projects as OpenStack projects – Projects that are allowed into OpenStack get to grab to a megaphone even if they have minimal feature sets.
- Be language neutral – Python is not the only language and start-ups need to make practical choices based on their objectives, staff and architecture.
- Have a stable base – start-ups don’t have time to troubleshoot both their own product and OpenStack. Without core stability, it’s risky to add OpenStack as a product requirement.
- Focus on interoperability – Start-ups don’t have time evangelize OpenStack. They need OpenStack to have large base of public and private installs because that creates an addressable market.
- Limit big companies from making big pre-announcements – Start-ups primary advantage is being a first/fast mover. When OpenStack members make announcements of intention (generally without substance) it damages the market for start-ups. Normally corporate announcements are just noise but they are given credibility when they appear to come from the community.
- Reduce the contribution tax and patch backlog – Start-ups must seek the path of least friction. If needed OpenStack code changes require a lot of work and time then they are unlikely to look for less expensive alternatives.
While I believe these items would help start-ups, they would have negative consequences for the large corporate contributors who have fashioned OpenStack into the type of project that supports their needs.
I’d love to what items you think I’ve overlooked or incorrectly added.
Pingback: OpenStack is as start-up friendly as anything][ stefano maffulli | ][ stefano maffulli
Thank you for thoughtful replies! Great counter points – OpenStack IS making progress on lots of fronts. IMHO BigCos will own the base platform but we need some help to make the ecosystem start-up friendly.
Pingback: OpenStack Community Weekly Newsletter (May 29 – June 5) - GREENSTACK
Pingback: OpenStack Vancouver six observations: partners, metal, tents, defore, brands & breakage | Rob Hirschfeld