[ClusterLabs Developers] OCF under the Linux Foundation?

Digimer lists at alteeve.ca
Tue Aug 16 01:47:57 EDT 2016

I think we've reached a consensus, though another day or two for
objections might be in order. Once thing I'd like to comment on though;

On 16/08/16 01:44 AM, Kristoffer Grönlund wrote:
> Ken Gaillot <kgaillot at redhat.com> writes:
>> How does everyone feel about this? Should we host the OCF standards
>> under the Linux Foundation, for greater reach and authority, and clear
>> neutrality? Or should we bring it under ClusterLabs, to keep everything
>> as simple as possible (and perhaps emphasize support for OSes beyond Linux)?
> To me, bringing it in under ClusterLabs sounds more interesting, to be
> honest. The community has direct control and it further clarifies that
> ClusterLabs is the core development hub for Pacemaker-based HA, plus

At the last HA Summit, when discussing the name, "Cluster Labs" was
proposed to be the group name so that we didn't restrict the group to
what we today consider to be the heart of (HA) clustering. In fact, we
didn't even want to make it HA specific. So the name was meant to be
flexible to support whatever direction, and whatever new project, might
come to pass.

Subtle but important point. We want to be inclusive and flexible. :)

> it's an opportunity to make the process for proposing changes simple and
> clear: Make a pull request at github.com/ClusterLabs/ocf, the discussion
> and acceptance/rejection happens there.
> The OCF standard is already stagnated, bringing in more overhead and
> process isn't going to improve that situation. From my perspective, it
> needs less of that, not more.

Papers and Projects: https://alteeve.ca/w/
What if the cure for cancer is trapped in the mind of a person without
access to education?

More information about the Developers mailing list