This Committee was formed during the OpenStack Ice House Summit in Hong Kong by Board Resolution on 11/4.
Our mission is to define "OpenStack Core" as chartered by the by-laws and guided by Governance/CoreDefinition
Objective / Scope
The DefCore charter is around how the OpenStack brand is applied for commercial uses. Initially, this focus is on "what is core" and sustaining that definition over time. The scope will likely expand since brand is an ongoing concern related to specialized marks and other use cases.
There are three ways in which the community uses the OpenStack brand including referring to projects.
- General community use of the mark
- Project-specific use associated with development activity
- DefCore-governed commercial use
While the top two of these uses are out of scope for DefCore, the committee has a need to participate in the discussion to ensure consistent and clear use.
How to Engage?
- Read the (pending) white paper and (pending) watch the video about DefCore.
- Join the [defcore-committee] list
- Join #refstack on Freenode IRC
- Follow PlanetOpenStack DefCore Tag (instructions pending)
- Follow the code at https://github.com/stackforge/refstack
- Register your user and then upload your test results to RefStack.org (instructions pending)
RefStack is a way of collecting and comparing test results that support the core definition process.
Details on using RefStack
- Meetings will be interactive using Google Hangouts (we will already stream for non-committee members)
- Members are expected to to their homework. We will _not_ be rehashing due to time limits.
- Meetings will work from resolutions that are proposed in advance with +/- voting (cochairs are +/-2)
- as per Board of Directors policy, we welcome broad engagement but cannot allow proxies on resolutions
- resolution +/- could be asserted before the meeting (but may have to be overruled based on discussion)
Defining OpenStack Core is a long term process and we are doing the work in progressive cycles. For reference, we have named the cycles. This helps describe concrete deliverables for a cycle while allowing discussion of the broader long term issues. For example, we may say that "item X is important to DefCore but out of scope for Elephant." We have found that this approach to breaking down the problem is necessary to maintain community consensus because we are taking smaller bites of the larger challenge (aka eating the elephant).
Spider (previous, Fall 2013)
- Find a consensus approach to moving forward on DefCore
- Define process by which Core will be defined
Elephant (current, Spring 2014)
- If needed, change the bylaws to reflect the Spider Core Principles
- Establish the "must-pass" tests, processes and tools
- Define tests that will be used to determine core based on Spider cycle work
- Lower the water in the discussion to expose broader issues
- Clearly identity "elephants" that we are not ready to resolve in this cycle
Names to be decided when we get there. Topics ("Elephants") that are intentionally pushed into the future:
- OpenStack Compatible Mark
- ... Committee Chairs will add to this ...
- 11/20 Governance/CoreDefinition/Meeting20131120
- 12/03 Governance/CoreDefinition/Meeting20131203
- 12/10 Criteria Subcommittee
- 12/17 1:30 PST Governance/CoreDefinition/Meeting20131217
- OIN impacts from Core/Commons definition
- How to figure out where we have gaps in Tempest coverage
- Program vs Project Definition Discussion
- Define a process by which programs are nominated for use with the mark by which tests certified for use with the mark test list is vetted and approved by the board
- 12/30 1:30 PST Criteria Subcommittee Meeting