I had jokingly called it the 'OpenStack Community Working Midcycle' during the UC meeting because I always wondered if the Gathering part of PTG had made it hard for people to get support to go. But I really do like the word contributor mentioned here and I think we should stress that in the re-naming as Operators and their feedback are a very large contribution.
Amy (spotz) On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 11:03 AM, Thierry Carrez <thie...@openstack.org> wrote: > Jimmy McArthur wrote: > > [...] > > We've been meeting regularly with the User Committee to help establish > > goals for the Committee as well as Operators and End Users. There are > > three critical things that we identified as immediate areas of concern: > > > > * How to involve operators, end users, and app-devs that are not in > > the normal cycle of communications within the community (IRC, MLs, > > Summit, Forum, etc..) > > * Ensuring a productive communication loop between the User and Dev > > communities so feedback from OS Days, local user groups, and Ops > > Meetups are communicated and brought to the Forum in a way that > > allows developers to address concerns in future release cycles. > > * Removing perceived barriers and building relationships between User > > and Dev communities > > ++ Great list! > > > [...] > > Ops 2H 2018 Meetup > > In addition to those questions, we'd like to pitch an option for you for > > the next Ops Meetup. The upcoming PTG is the week of September 10 in > > North America. We have an opportunity to co-locate the Ops Meetup at the > > PTG. > > I think it's generally a good idea, especially for work sessions. The > PTG already turned into an event where any group of contributors, > whatever their focus is, can meet in person and do some work. We had the > Public Cloud WG in Dublin and I feel like they had very productive > discussions ! > > > If the Ops community was interested in this, we would have separate > > space with your own work sessions and separate branding for the Ops > > attendees. This would also involve updating the language on the > > OpenStack website and potentially renaming the PTG to something more > > inclusive to both groups. > > Personally, I'm not a big fan of separate branding (or "co-location"). > If the "PTG" name is seen as too developer-centric, I'd rather change > the event name (and clearly make it a work event for anyone contributing > to OpenStack, whatever the shape of their group). Otherwise we just > perpetuate the artificial separation by calling it an ops event > co-located with a dev event. It's really a single "contributor" event. > > -- > Thierry Carrez (ttx) > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-operators mailing list > OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators >
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-operators mailing list OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
