On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 3:40 AM Chris Dent <cdent...@anticdent.org> wrote:
> > However, it makes me sad to see the continued trend of limiting > in-person gatherings. They are useful as a way of keeping people > aligned with similar goals and approaches to reaching those goals. > Yes, it is expensive, but it would be nice if the patrons (our > employers) would recognize that getting us all working well together > is a cost of doing this business. > To echo (and add an angle) what Chris is saying: follow the money. Sales and marketing has traditionally gotten more dollars than dev, and I feel that splitting the summit into two is the start of the long slow budget-cutting death of the design summit. "Sorry, we just can't afford to send you this year" is going to erode attendance. Also, it doesn't seem like alternative cost-savings solutions have been considered. For example, how about we host a summit in a Not-Top-Tier city for a change? Examples that come to mind are Columbus, Pittsburgh, and Indianapolis, which each have convention centers larger than Austin. On the upside, if we're going down this path, can I recommend that the Ops summit be combined with the marketing summit? It seems like a natural fit to put People Who Deploy OpenStack together with People Who Sell Things To People Who Deploy OpenStack. Michael
__________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
