Mailing List Archive

Sorry - http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303851804579560290024021158

--

Joshua McKenty
Chief Technology Officer
Piston Cloud Computing, Inc.
+1 (650) 242-5683
+1 (650) 283-6846
http://www.pistoncloud.com

"Oh, Westley, we'll never survive!"
"Nonsense. You're only saying that because no one ever has."

On May 14, 2014, at 6:34 AM, Dave Neary <dneary@redhat.com> wrote:

> Hi Josh,
>
> Do you have a link?
>
> Thanks,
> Dave.
>
> On 05/14/2014 09:07 AM, Joshua McKenty wrote:
>> Board members et al,
>>
>> As usual, I am not a lawyer. However, given the overtones of antitrust concern in this article, if other board members and/or foundation staff feel that we should discuss this, I would ask that we schedule a quick board-coffee-meeting. We need to avoid any walking quorums, and we also need to instruct Jonathan and foundation staff with a clear response. This is not a topic where I feel it would be appropriate for Alan to represent the board.
>>
>> Joshua
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> _______________________________________________
>> Foundation mailing list
>> Foundation@lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>>
>
> --
> Dave Neary - Community Action and Impact
> Open Source and Standards, Red Hat - http://community.redhat.com
> Ph: +33 9 50 71 55 62 / Cell: +33 6 77 01 92 13

I am heading back to Boston now but am available for a call later.

> On May 14, 2014, at 9:40 AM, Joshua McKenty <joshua@pistoncloud.com> wrote:
>
> Sorry - http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303851804579560290024021158
>
> --
>
> Joshua McKenty
> Chief Technology Officer
> Piston Cloud Computing, Inc.
> +1 (650) 242-5683
> +1 (650) 283-6846
> http://www.pistoncloud.com
>
> "Oh, Westley, we'll never survive!"
> "Nonsense. You're only saying that because no one ever has."
>
>> On May 14, 2014, at 6:34 AM, Dave Neary <dneary@redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Josh,
>>
>> Do you have a link?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Dave.
>>
>>> On 05/14/2014 09:07 AM, Joshua McKenty wrote:
>>> Board members et al,
>>>
>>> As usual, I am not a lawyer. However, given the overtones of antitrust concern in this article, if other board members and/or foundation staff feel that we should discuss this, I would ask that we schedule a quick board-coffee-meeting. We need to avoid any walking quorums, and we also need to instruct Jonathan and foundation staff with a clear response. This is not a topic where I feel it would be appropriate for Alan to represent the board.
>>>
>>> Joshua
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Foundation mailing list
>>> Foundation@lists.openstack.org
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>>
>> --
>> Dave Neary - Community Action and Impact
>> Open Source and Standards, Red Hat - http://community.redhat.com
>> Ph: +33 9 50 71 55 62 / Cell: +33 6 77 01 92 13
>
> _______________________________________________
> Foundation mailing list
> Foundation@lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation

Anyone with access forward a PDF version?

~sean

On May 14, 2014, at 9:47 AM, "Joshua McKenty" <joshua@pistoncloud.com<mailto:joshua@pistoncloud.com>> wrote:

Sorry - http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303851804579560290024021158

--

Joshua McKenty
Chief Technology Officer
Piston Cloud Computing, Inc.
+1 (650) 242-5683
+1 (650) 283-6846
http://www.pistoncloud.com

"Oh, Westley, we'll never survive!"
"Nonsense. You're only saying that because no one ever has."

On May 14, 2014, at 6:34 AM, Dave Neary <dneary@redhat.com<mailto:dneary@redhat.com>> wrote:

Hi Josh,

Do you have a link?

Thanks,
Dave.

On 05/14/2014 09:07 AM, Joshua McKenty wrote:
Board members et al,

As usual, I am not a lawyer. However, given the overtones of antitrust concern in this article, if other board members and/or foundation staff feel that we should discuss this, I would ask that we schedule a quick board-coffee-meeting. We need to avoid any walking quorums, and we also need to instruct Jonathan and foundation staff with a clear response. This is not a topic where I feel it would be appropriate for Alan to represent the board.

Joshua

Sent from my iPhone
_______________________________________________
Foundation mailing list
Foundation@lists.openstack.org<mailto:Foundation@lists.openstack.org>
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation


--
Dave Neary - Community Action and Impact
Open Source and Standards, Red Hat - http://community.redhat.com
Ph: +33 9 50 71 55 62 / Cell: +33 6 77 01 92 13

_______________________________________________
Foundation mailing list
Foundation@lists.openstack.org<mailto:Foundation@lists.openstack.org>
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation

is it this one? Title: Red Hat Plays Hardball on OpenStack Software

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CCsQqQIwAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fonline.wsj.com%2Farticle%2FSB10001424052702303851804579560290024021158.html&ei=aIpzU_vzFevJsQT_kIGoBw&usg=AFQjCNHe46xKvlhxjlEttnUlRWwzhEXyLA&sig2=sMzbNDF7bRan-69AJ0a5fQ&bvm=bv.66699033,d.cWc&cad=rja

Trick: if you google the title of the article, WSJ will give you the
full article but if you follow the url straight from a link, WSJ
requires login

On 05/14/2014 09:38 AM, Joshua McKenty wrote:
> Sorry
> - http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303851804579560290024021158
>
> --
>
> Joshua McKenty
> Chief Technology Officer
> Piston Cloud Computing, Inc.
> +1 (650) 242-5683
> +1 (650) 283-6846
> http://www.pistoncloud.com
>
> "Oh, Westley, we'll never survive!"
> "Nonsense. You're only saying that because no one ever has."
>
> On May 14, 2014, at 6:34 AM, Dave Neary <dneary@redhat.com
> <mailto:dneary@redhat.com>> wrote:
>
>> Hi Josh,
>>
>> Do you have a link?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Dave.
>>
>> On 05/14/2014 09:07 AM, Joshua McKenty wrote:
>>> Board members et al,
>>>
>>> As usual, I am not a lawyer. However, given the overtones of
>>> antitrust concern in this article, if other board members and/or
>>> foundation staff feel that we should discuss this, I would ask that
>>> we schedule a quick board-coffee-meeting. We need to avoid any
>>> walking quorums, and we also need to instruct Jonathan and foundation
>>> staff with a clear response. This is not a topic where I feel it
>>> would be appropriate for Alan to represent the board.
>>>
>>> Joshua
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Foundation mailing list
>>> Foundation@lists.openstack.org <mailto:Foundation@lists.openstack.org>
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Dave Neary - Community Action and Impact
>> Open Source and Standards, Red Hat - http://community.redhat.com
>> Ph: +33 9 50 71 55 62 / Cell: +33 6 77 01 92 13
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Foundation mailing list
> Foundation@lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>

--
Ask and answer questions on https://ask.openstack.org

_______________________________________________
Foundation mailing list
Foundation@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation

Wow do people actually still read Murdoch press?

:)

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joshua McKenty [mailto:joshua@pistoncloud.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, 14 May 2014 11:07 PM
> To: foundation@lists.openstack.org
> Subject: [OpenStack Foundation] Today's WSJ article
>
> Board members et al,
>
> As usual, I am not a lawyer. However, given the overtones of antitrust
concern in
> this article, if other board members and/or foundation staff feel that
we should
> discuss this, I would ask that we schedule a quick board-coffee-meeting.
We need to
> avoid any walking quorums, and we also need to instruct Jonathan and
foundation
> staff with a clear response. This is not a topic where I feel it would
be appropriate
> for Alan to represent the board.
>
> Joshua
>
> Sent from my iPhone
> _______________________________________________
> Foundation mailing list
> Foundation@lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation

_______________________________________________
Foundation mailing list
Foundation@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation

Board & Stff,

I've seen (and heard) a lot about this; however, I'm not clear about the follow-up?

Are we calling a special board meeting (I'd support that) to discuss or is the Foundation crafting a response?

Rob

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joshua McKenty [mailto:joshua@pistoncloud.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2014 9:07 AM
> To: foundation@lists.openstack.org
> Subject: [OpenStack Foundation] Today's WSJ article
>
> Board members et al,
>
> As usual, I am not a lawyer. However, given the overtones of antitrust
> concern in this article, if other board members and/or foundation
> staff feel that we should discuss this, I would ask that we schedule a quick board-coffee-meeting.
> We need to avoid any walking quorums, and we also need to instruct
> Jonathan and foundation staff with a clear response. This is not a
> topic where I feel it would be appropriate for Alan to represent the board.
>
> Joshua
>
> Sent from my iPhone
> _______________________________________________
> Foundation mailing list
> Foundation@lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation

So, I kind of think WSJ missed something big here. From my understanding,
having gone through this just a few months ago is this:

- Red Hat will not support non-Red Hat OpenStack on Red Hat Enterprise.
- Don't expect help from Red Hat on OpenStack or it's components if you
rolled your own deploy on RHEL.
- Red Hat will support under their VM licensing, the VM's that run within
any cloud, regardless of the underlying infrastructure.
- Distro's like Mirantis come in the form of an iso installer anyways, Fuel
being based on CentOS and you have a choice of distro on the control
services/hypervisors.

Brandon



On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 10:03 AM, <Rob_Hirschfeld@dell.com> wrote:

> Board & Stff,
>
>
>
> I’ve seen (and heard) a lot about this; however, I’m not clear about the
> follow-up?
>
>
>
> Are we calling a special board meeting (I’d support that) to discuss or is
> the Foundation crafting a response?
>
>
>
> Rob
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Joshua McKenty [mailto:joshua@pistoncloud.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2014 9:07 AM
> > To: foundation@lists.openstack.org
> > Subject: [OpenStack Foundation] Today's WSJ article
> >
> > Board members et al,
> >
> > As usual, I am not a lawyer. However, given the overtones of antitrust
> > concern in this article, if other board members and/or foundation
> > staff feel that we should discuss this, I would ask that we schedule a
> quick board-coffee-meeting.
> > We need to avoid any walking quorums, and we also need to instruct
> > Jonathan and foundation staff with a clear response. This is not a
> > topic where I feel it would be appropriate for Alan to represent the
> board.
> >
> > Joshua
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone
> > _______________________________________________
> > Foundation mailing list
> > Foundation@lists.openstack.org
> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Foundation mailing list
> Foundation@lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>
>

Hi Rob,

You probably saw that we posted a statement on the blog this weekend. It’s intent was to clarify that the Board has taken no action at this point. Community discussion is great, but we were seeing some confusion about the etherpad from this thread. It is not something the Foundation Board has adopted as a policy, and no Board action has been planned around it.

In my reading, the language Josh drafted simply states the fact that OpenStack is a flexible technology that runs well in multiple environments, Linux-based or otherwise. That’s an important design tenet, however, I’m not sure how the draft language as it stands would be translated to a Foundation "policy" that we would enforce. I talked with Josh, and we actually moved it to a re-labeled wiki page to try to make that clear and get a permanent home for continued community input. We can use the discussion and editing features there to keep iterating on it: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/TechnologyIntegrationPrinciples

Ultimately, users and the competitive marketplace around OpenStack are the forces driving our ecosystem. If a company's commercial decisions are found to create problems for the commitments they've made to the OpenStack Foundation and community, then we'll deal with that. But until that point, the community is the referee. That's how open source works.

Of course, these are just my views, and I'm interested in hearing others as well.

Jonathan


On May 16, 2014, at 12:03 PM, Rob_Hirschfeld@Dell.com wrote:

> Board & Stff,
>
> I’ve seen (and heard) a lot about this; however, I’m not clear about the follow-up?
>
> Are we calling a special board meeting (I’d support that) to discuss or is the Foundation crafting a response?
>
> Rob
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Joshua McKenty [mailto:joshua@pistoncloud.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2014 9:07 AM
> > To: foundation@lists.openstack.org
> > Subject: [OpenStack Foundation] Today's WSJ article
> >
> > Board members et al,
> >
> > As usual, I am not a lawyer. However, given the overtones of antitrust
> > concern in this article, if other board members and/or foundation
> > staff feel that we should discuss this, I would ask that we schedule a quick board-coffee-meeting.
> > We need to avoid any walking quorums, and we also need to instruct
> > Jonathan and foundation staff with a clear response. This is not a
> > topic where I feel it would be appropriate for Alan to represent the board.
> >
> > Joshua
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone
> > _______________________________________________
> > Foundation mailing list
> > Foundation@lists.openstack.org
> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>


_______________________________________________
Foundation mailing list
Foundation@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation

Jonathan,

I saw the posting and agree with your point about the community being the referee. I do have concerns that that also means press/analyst megaphones and lawyers shaping the discussion instead of the Foundation.

I think that Joshua was trying to get ahead of that and I'm glad to see some formalization around the open design tenet.

We should make sure to do follow-up on this as a learning exercise. I'm also looking forward to reading more from the relevant parties as time passes. I think it's hard to really respond to a snippet of information from the WSJ article which could be (and was!) interpreted in many different ways. I suspect this may become a regular exercise during summits because it attracts a lot of attention.

Thanks. You and Lauren had answered my concerns.

Rob

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jonathan Bryce [mailto:jonathan@openstack.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 2:42 PM
> To: foundation@lists.openstack.org
> Subject: Re: [OpenStack Foundation] Today's WSJ article
>
> Hi Rob,
>
> You probably saw that we posted a statement on the blog this weekend.
> It's intent was to clarify that the Board has taken no action at this
> point. Community discussion is great, but we were seeing some
> confusion about the etherpad from this thread. It is not something the
> Foundation Board has adopted as a policy, and no Board action has been planned around it.
>
> In my reading, the language Josh drafted simply states the fact that
> OpenStack is a flexible technology that runs well in multiple
> environments, Linux-based or otherwise. That's an important design
> tenet, however, I'm not sure how the draft language as it stands would
> be translated to a Foundation "policy" that we would enforce. I talked
> with Josh, and we actually moved it to a re-labeled wiki page to try
> to make that clear and get a permanent home for continued community
> input. We can use the discussion and editing features there to keep
> iterating on it:
> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/TechnologyIntegrationPrinciples
>
> Ultimately, users and the competitive marketplace around OpenStack are
> the forces driving our ecosystem. If a company's commercial decisions
> are found to create problems for the commitments they've made to the
> OpenStack Foundation and community, then we'll deal with that. But
> until that point, the community is the referee. That's how open source works.
>
> Of course, these are just my views, and I'm interested in hearing others as well.
>
> Jonathan
>
>
> On May 16, 2014, at 12:03 PM, Rob_Hirschfeld@Dell.com wrote:
>
> > Board & Stff,
> >
> > I've seen (and heard) a lot about this; however, I'm not clear about
> > the follow-
> up?
> >
> > Are we calling a special board meeting (I'd support that) to discuss
> > or is the
> Foundation crafting a response?
> >
> > Rob
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Joshua McKenty [mailto:joshua@pistoncloud.com]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2014 9:07 AM
> > > To: foundation@lists.openstack.org
> > > Subject: [OpenStack Foundation] Today's WSJ article
> > >
> > > Board members et al,
> > >
> > > As usual, I am not a lawyer. However, given the overtones of
> > > antitrust concern in this article, if other board members and/or
> > > foundation staff feel that we should discuss this, I would ask
> > > that we
> schedule a quick board-coffee-meeting.
> > > We need to avoid any walking quorums, and we also need to instruct
> > > Jonathan and foundation staff with a clear response. This is not a
> > > topic where I feel it would be appropriate for Alan to represent the board.
> > >
> > > Joshua
> > >
> > > Sent from my iPhone
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Foundation mailing list
> > > Foundation@lists.openstack.org
> > > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Foundation mailing list
> Foundation@lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation