On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 10:30:59AM -0500, Kyle Mestery wrote: > On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 10:13 AM, Sandy Walsh <sandy.wa...@rackspace.com> > wrote: > > On 8/14/2014 11:28 AM, Russell Bryant wrote: > >> On 08/14/2014 10:04 AM, CARVER, PAUL wrote: > >>> Daniel P. Berrange [mailto:berra...@redhat.com] wrote: > >>> > >>>> Depending on the usage needs, I think Google hangouts is a quite useful > >>>> technology. For many-to-many session its limit of 10 participants can be > >>>> an issue, but for a few-to-many broadcast it could be practical. What I > >>>> find particularly appealing is the way it can live stream the session > >>>> over youtube which allows for unlimited number of viewers, as well as > >>>> being available offline for later catchup. > >>> I can't actually offer AT&T resources without getting some level of > >>> management approval first, but just for the sake of discussion here's > >>> some info about the telepresence system we use. > >>> > >>> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > >>> ATS B2B Telepresence conferences can be conducted with an external > >>> company's > >>> Telepresence room(s), which subscribe to the AT&T Telepresence Solution, > >>> or a limited number of other Telepresence service provider's networks. > >>> > >>> Currently, the number of Telepresence rooms that can participate in a B2B > >>> conference is limited to a combined total of 20 rooms (19 of which can be > >>> AT&T rooms, depending on the number of remote endpoints included). > >>> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > >>> > >>> We currently have B2B interconnect with over 100 companies and AT&T has > >>> telepresence rooms in many of our locations around the US and around > >>> the world. If other large OpenStack companies also have telepresence > >>> rooms that we could interconnect with I think it might be possible > >>> to get management agreement to hold a couple OpenStack meetups per > >>> year. > >>> > >>> Most of our rooms are best suited for 6 people, but I know of at least > >>> one 18 person telepresence room near me. > >> An ideal solution would allow attendees to join as individuals from > >> anywhere. A lot of contributors work from home. Is that sort of thing > >> compatible with your system? > >> > > http://bluejeans.com/ was a good experience. > > > > What about Google Hangout OnAir for the PTL and core, while others are > > view-only with chat/irc questions? > > > This is a terrible idea, as it perpetuates the "core vs. non-core" > argument. We need equal participation for cores and non-cores alike.
Yeah I think we'd have to be careful about doing such a distinct split in participation between groups of people. I think the idea of some people full-access, others view-only will only be viable for those discussions where it was focused as an information dissemination event. eg 1 or a handful of people presenting some kind of proposal / problem, and then have the interactive discussion part in a more broadly inclusive arena like IRC or email. Or if there were discussions which are inherantly core only work already so that there wasn't an expectation of more general non-core attendance. Regards, Daniel -- |: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :| _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
