The document provides an empirical evaluation of the first year of the OpenDaylight project. It summarizes that in terms of code, the OpenDaylight community has produced a large amount of code and seen steady increases. In terms of adoption, some vendor products are now based on OpenDaylight and there has been non-vendor use. However, industry perception remains mixed. Regarding the community, there is a large set of formal and informal members but committer diversity needs more work at the project level.

1. AN EMPIRICAL EVALUATION OF YEAR 1
!
Anees Shaikh
1

2. A YEAR AGO AT ONS
Inder Gopal
Board Chairman, OpenDaylight Project
Open Networking Summit, Apr 2013
2

3. FOCUS OF THIS TALK
•
Outside-in look at OpenDaylight — using real data where possible
•
Some self-evaluation — successes and shortcomings
3

4. HOW TO MEASURE SUCCESS?
•
OpenDaylight goals: Code, Adoption, and Community
•
•
Adoption — vendor products, user deployments, industry perception
•
•
Code — projects and the Hydrogen release
Community — diverse, thriving group of developers
“You’ll know it when you see it”
4

5. OPENDAYLIGHT PROJECT CREATION
5 new project proposals pending
OpenDaylight approved projects
16
12
12
14
13
15
15
15
16
16
January
February
8
4
0
2
2
April
May
3
June
July
August
September October November December
5

6. OPENDAYLIGHT PLATFORM
6

7. OPENDAYLIGHT CODE VOLUME
(OHLOH.NET)
Java
461,768
C++
291,849
C
146,115
Python
33,539
0
7
200000
400000

8. PROJECT COMPARISONS (OHLOH.NET)
LOC
OpenStack
1.67M
1,974
CloudStack
1.5M
250
Eclipse platform
2.67M
404
OpenDaylight
1.05M
154
Floodlight
97K
52
contrail-vrouter
contrail controller
8
contributors
19K
258K
15
53

9. MEMBERSHIP
— WHO WANTS TO PLAY
35
28
29
31
33
26
23
20
22
18
13
5
April 8 launch June 3
June 5
June 15
9
October 3 January 16 February 4

10. VENDOR ADOPTION — PRODUCTS BUILT WITH OPENDAYLIGHT
3Q 2013
1Q 2014
10

11. NON-VENDOR USERS OF OPENDAYLIGHT
•
University of Kentucky (OVSDB project)
•
ITRI — Taiwan (SNMP4SDN project)
•
CableLabs (PCMM/ COPS prototype and
proposal)
•
Individual users / developers (dlux project,
python client proposal, …)
11

12. INDUSTRY PERCEPTION
In the beginning …
A New Hope!
12

13. INDUSTRY PERCEPTION
In the middle …
The Skeptics Strike Back
13

14. INDUSTRY PERCEPTION
first release —
Return of the Jedi ?
14

15. PROJECT ANALYSIS
•
Stackalytics analysis
•
•
code reviews
•
mailing list activity
•
•
project code submissions
lines of code
originally developed for monitoring
OpenStack, adapted for OpenDaylight (in a
hurry — use these numbers for trends, not
absolutes)
15

16. DISTRIBUTION OF COMMITS — MAY ’13 TO JAN ‘14
Total to date
individual graphs in ‘Additional Material’
16

17. DISTRIBUTION OF COMMITS (OS AND ODP)
OpenDaylight Hydrogen
OpenStack Diablo
17

18. DISTRIBUTION OF CODE (LOC)
May 2013
January 2014
18

19. PROJECT COMMITTER DIVERSITY — GOOD
integration
openflowplugin
19
ovsdb

20. PROJECT COMMITTER DIVERSITY— NOT SO GOOD
controller
bgpcep
opendove
these are just examples — there are other projects with similar distributions
20

21. MAILING LIST ACTIVITY DISTRIBUTION
May ‘13
Jan ‘14
21

22. SUMMARY — HOW DID WE DO?
•
Code
😎
OpenDaylight community has produced a tremendous amount of code in a short period, steady
increase
• Adoption
• vendor products based on OpenDaylight announced or shipping 😃
•
•
non-vendor use and extensions to OpenDaylight 😊
industry perception still mixed 😕
• Community
• large set of formal and non-affiliated members 😃
•
•
overall committer number and diversity increasing 😊
•
project-level committer diversity needs more work 😕
22

23. ADDITIONAL MATERIAL
23

24. DISTRIBUTION OF COMMITS
May 2013
24

25. DISTRIBUTION OF COMMITS
June 2013
25

26. DISTRIBUTION OF COMMITS
July 2013
26

27. DISTRIBUTION OF COMMITS
August 2013
27

28. DISTRIBUTION OF COMMITS
September 2013
28

29. DISTRIBUTION OF COMMITS
October 2013
29

30. DISTRIBUTION OF COMMITS
November 2013
30

31. DISTRIBUTION OF COMMITS
December 2013
31

32. DISTRIBUTION OF COMMITS
January 2014
32

33. Total to date
33