If the timing works, that seems fine :)
Regards,
Tom
On 07/04/14 10:32, Michael Still wrote:
It might be that this is happening because there is no clear incumbent
for the Nova PTL position. Is it ok to hold off on this until after
the outcome of the election is known?
Michael
On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 2:23 PM, Tom Fifield <t...@openstack.org> wrote:
So far, there's been no comment from anyone working on nova, so there's been
no session proposed.
I can, of course, propose a session ... but without buy-in from the project
team it's unlikely to be accepted.
Regards,
Tom
On 01/04/14 22:44, Matt Van Winkle wrote:
So, I've been watching the etherpad and the summit submissions and I
noticed that there isn't anything for nova. Maybe I'm off base, but it
seems like we'd be missing the mark to not have a Developer/Operator's
exchange on the key product. Is there anything we can do to get a session
slotted like these other products?
Thanks!
Matt
On 3/28/14 2:01 AM, "Tom Fifield" <t...@openstack.org> wrote:
Thanks to those projects that responded. I've proposed sessions in
swift, ceilometer, tripleO and horizon.
On 17/03/14 07:54, Tom Fifield wrote:
All,
Many times we've heard a desire for more feedback and interaction from
users. However, their attendance at design summit sessions is met with
varied success.
However, last summit, by happy accident, a swift session turned into a
something a lot more user driven. A competent user was able to describe
their use case, and the developers were able to stage a number of
question to them. In this way, some of the assumptions about the way
certain things were implemented, and the various priorities of future
plans became clearer. It worked really well ... perhaps this is
something we'd like to have happen for all the projects?
*Idea*: Add an "ops" session for each project in the design summit
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/ATL-ops-dedicated-design-summit-sessions
Most operators running OpenStack tend to treat it more holistically than
those coding it. They are aware of, but don't necessarily think or work
in terms of project breakdowns. To this end, I'd imagine the such
sessions would:
* have a primary purpose for developers to ask the operators to
answer
questions, and request information
* allow operators to tell the developers things (give feedback) as a
secondary purpose that could potentially be covered better in a
cross-project session
* need good moderation, for example to push operator-to-operator
discussion into forums with more time available (eg
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/ATL-ops-unconference-RFC )
* be reinforced by having volunteer "good" users in potentially every
design summit session
(https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/ATL-ops-in-design-sessions )
Anyway, just a strawman - please jump on the etherpad
(https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/ATL-ops-dedicated-design-summit-session
s)
or leave your replies here!
Regards,
Tom
_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
