Amir Michael, manager of systems engineering at Facebook and a key player in the company's Open Compute Project (OCP), used his opening keynote at the sixth annual Linux Foundation Collaboration Summit to decry the current state of server-management code. Michael said that too many server manufacturers – and the hardware vendors …
I think this may work, and may even beneficial for some people.
But I think such projects could easily collapse the very moment where one of the (bigger) players has worked out an excellent design (at least in their opinion) which then won't make it into the official specs itself.
So you have set something up which you know will work for you, yet it doesn't get implemented. What do you do ?
My guess is that you then leave the whole project again and continue setting up your environment in the way you intended it in the first place.
Sharing knowledge and experience is often a very good idea, but when it comes to this then I get a weird feeling when people are trying to 'regulate' some stuff.
Could be just me though...
The perfect solution
A friend and I came up with the ideal solution to this dilemma: get Zynga to create a new game - ServerFarmVille. Players take on the role of DataCenter admins. Instead of growing plants or zombies, they get points for solving trouble tickets such as disk space increases and virtual server moves. What they don't realize is that their in-game actions have real effects on the underlying infrastructure.
Little boxes on the hillside
The way the server manufactures read this is
"Please design your hardware all the same so you can be replaced the the next up and coming Chinese manufacture that builds his parts at 10 cents less then yours."
It's good for the end user to have a standard interface, but the manufactures will be fighting like dogs for pennies all while dreaming they could have profits like Apple.