cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Noah Slater <>
Subject Re:
Date Sat, 20 Oct 2012 17:35:00 GMT
On 20 October 2012 18:10, David Nalley <> wrote:

> On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 12:37 PM, Noah Slater <> wrote:
> > Hmm, "cloudstack-extras" seems to me like something that the Apache
> > CloudStack project is providing. I was hoping for Shane's input on this,
> > which is why I didn't say anything after looping him in.
> This sat for over a week with nary a comment.

I volunteer my time to this project. Any contributions I make are on my own
time. My employer does not pay me to contribute. CloudStack is
an extremely high traffic project and I am doing the best I can to
contribute to it.

> I don't mean to vent my
> frustration, but if you thought there was a problem why not say
> something

I did.

The CloudStack account on Github needs to be cleaned up then. Perhaps
> rename it so that it is clear the account is operated by Citrix. At the
> moment, it looks like a canonical source for Apache CloudStack. Obviously,
> this isn't okay. "CloudStack" is (or will be) a trademark of the ASF, and
> needs to be used appropriately.

-- "Github integration", 29 Sep 2012,

Some ways in which the current CloudStack account on GitHub are
> problematic:

   - CloudStack is used as the account name, in both the URL and the UI
>    - The account advertises itself as the "CloudStack Project"
>    - There is a repository itself called "CloudStack"
>    - There is a link to
>    - The word "CloudStack" is frequently used in repository names
>    - There isn't a single mention of Apache anywhere on the page

> Now, admittedly, all of these things exist because this account used to be

the home of CloudStack. It is not as if someone has come along after the

fact, and is now using our name irresponsibly. But they still present an

issue, because there is significant scope for confusion here.

> I am assuming there are already plans in place to retire the original

repository as part of the move to Apache. This should, of course, include a

rebranding, and a reworking of this GitHub account. Do you know what the

timeline is for that?

-- "Github integration", 29 Sep 2012,

> or at least say don't move forward

I only just read your response.

- instead you cced
> trademarks@, who have also been silent

I CCed Shane (our VP of Brand Management) because I wanted his input. I
brought up the concern previously on the mailing list, and nothing much
seemed to happen. This time, I thought I would loop Shane in to clarify any
questions. I guess he was busy too.

> How long should I have waited?

I don't know. But following up was another option. Sometimes emails get
lost in the noise. After 6 days you posted a note to say you were going to
go ahead and name the repos. You assumed lazy consensus, but I think my
previous notes to the list should have been indication enough that we had
not established consensus.

> I could have left this as
> and not spent the time and energy to make the
> move, blog about it, notify the many people who this move affects etc.

This isn't really an option, as I have outlined before.

> While I seek to make sure we do what is best for the project, it's
> exhausting to try and comply with the demands, only to propose things,
> get zero feedback, make the changes, publicize the changes, and then
> days later get feedback that it isn't acceptable.

This is an unfair characterisation of my involvement. I have not made any
"demands" of you. I gave repeated, and detailed feedback on this issue. But
this seems to have been ignored.

> To that end, I've
> made you an admin on that github project - please take whatever action
> suits you.

This is a disappointing response. Of course, I will take no such action.
Despite the fact that I am not prepared to unilaterally change something as
important as this Github organisation without all the facts, my aim is to
help Apache CloudStack adjust to Apache. If the response to my guidance is
"oh well, you better fix it then" then I am obviously doing a very poor job.

> > There are still several problems with this page:
> >
> >    - The "cloudstack-extras" name seems confusing, as stated above. The
> >    Apache extras is fine, because we are providing it. But Apache has no
> >    oversight for this repository, so it should clearly indicate it's
> >    provenance. (i.e. Citrix tools for CloudStack — which would,
> incidentally,
> >    be a much better name. Perhaps change it to "Citrix"?)
> We toyed with the idea of Citrix - and I can probably jump through the
> hoops for that as well, but Citrix would also have issues with this,
> as virtually none of the software contained therein belongs to Citrix,
> nor do they really have control over it. This is largely code without
> a single unifying owner. The only commonality is that it is focused on
> CloudStack. Most of the items contained therein have been developed by
> people working on and around cloudstack. For instance,,
> Opscode, and Enstratus employees wrote knife-cloudstack with no Citrix
> contributions whatsoever.

I don't know what to suggest then. Perhaps "cloudstack-extras" is not such
a big problem. I will defer to Shane, who has way more experience with this
than I do.


  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message