I guess the simplest meaning is "all those that are not committing code to the OpenStack code base"? :D
> -----Original Message----- > From: Everett Toews [mailto:everett.to...@rackspace.com] > Sent: Wednesday, 18 December 2013 1:54 AM > To: Tristan Goode > Cc: Tom Fifield; <openstack@lists.openstack.org> > Subject: Re: [Openstack] Bringing focus to the Operators and Users at the next > summit > > Hi Tristan, > > Can you clarify what you meant by Users in your subject line? > > I took it to mean application developers (i.e. the developers writing applications on > top of OpenStack) and possibly application operators (i.e. the operators deploying > applications on top of OpenStack). They seem to have gotten lost in the discussion > here. > > Ultimately, OpenStack is being built for them. As I believe was your original intent, > they need a voice in such a forum too. I realize that even less application developers > are likely to attend the summit than operators. > > However we still need to encourage their involvement and make a place for them. > We also need to encourage operators to gather feedback from their application > developers about their experiences developer on top of OpenStack as I'm sure the > operations folk get an occasional ear full from them. ;) > > Thanks, > Everett > > P.S. Just to be clear...because we have a lot of overlapping terminology. > > application developers = the developers writing applications on top of OpenStack > application operators = the operators deploying applications on top of OpenStack > [OpenStack] developers = the developers writing OpenStack [OpenStack] operators > = the developers deploying OpenStack > > > On Dec 17, 2013, at 3:24 AM, Tristan Goode wrote: > > > Perfect stated Tom. Thank you. > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Tom Fifield [mailto:t...@openstack.org] > >> Sent: Tuesday, 17 December 2013 11:23 AM > >> To: openstack@lists.openstack.org > >> Subject: Re: [Openstack] Bringing focus to the Operators and Users at > > the next > >> summit > >> > >> On 17/12/13 02:55, Tim Bell wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>> Specifying something as a bug needs to determine things like 'what > >>> component should this be addressed in' and describing the desired > >>> behaviour. Many of the comments from the survey describe the pain > >>> points, rather than the solutions. Upgrading is difficult, no > >>> mechanism to auto restart VMs on other hypervisors, monitoring > >>> frameworks, inconsistent options in command line tools and APIs, . > >>> equally, missing functional gaps do not fall well into the bug system. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> I have received the feedback from operators when raising issues that > >>> they get the response 'contributions are welcome'. Running an > >>> openstack cloud can be non-trivial, especially the big ones, and > >>> there is a need to appreciate that this effort is a significant part > >>> of the OpenStack community effort (along with the blogs, the > >>> documentation updates, the summit presentations). > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> I personally have a different proposal to Tristan (although I like > >>> his). my proposal is that each program should have a session > >>> dedicated to user/operator needs at the start. Between the UC, the > >>> volunteers to look at the survey comments and the user group > >>> ambassadors, we should be able to put together a set of pain points > >>> to be considered for the next release. solutions are up to the design teams. > >> > >> While I think that having such a session in each program fits well > >> with > > "our" (being > >> "the developers'") mentality and/or schedule, I feel that it does not > > suit with that of > >> operators. > >> > >> This is because, as an operator, you typically don't just have > >> problems > > or feedback > >> with one project. > >> > >> Looking through the survey comments, it's likely that if those kind > >> of > > operators were > >> attending summits, they'd have to attend a high fraction of every > >> such > > session. > >> > >> In addition, points of pain can often be about the integration > >> between > > services, the > >> consistency between them, or whole-of-project issues. Like the fact > >> our > > python > >> clients all have different import lines, or the way DNS works between > > Nova and > >> Neutron, and so on. > >> > >> > >> The conversation of late has been leaning towards a happy scenario > >> where "operators" and "developers" come together in a session and the > >> former > > presents > >> their concerns to the latter, who promptly go away and Fix All The > > Things. > >> > >> To be frank, having been on the "operator" side of the fence, and > > participating in all > >> of the frequent cursing, desk-slamming, whiteboard-workarounding, > > nagios-alert- > >> spam-receiving it takes to run an OpenStack cloud ... I'm not sure we > > can let > >> "operators" loose in such a session without some kind of filter - it > > might put > >> "developers" off helping if we descent into full sysadmin rant :) But > >> we > > do need to > >> get that feedback through somehow. > >> > >> I have full appreciation for the session that the swift team ran with > > the LINE guys at > >> Hong Kong - that was seriously awesome to hear about and we should be > > doing > >> more of it. Though, I believe some of the value came from the fact > >> that > > it was an > >> individual user stepping through their entire requirements. > >> Challenging > > the > >> assumptions. Quite different from a torrent of people in a room :) > >> > >> > >> The survey comments we've got are good, as is the plan Tim has put > > together to > >> wrangle them into a format where they perhaps can be taken to > >> developers > > as bugs, > >> or blueprints - as Joe suggested. However, due to the nature of the > > survey, they are > >> most often brief, and surface-level. > >> > >> I believe what "getting Operators in a room" can achieve for us is > > providing that > >> same kind of feedback, but with far greater depth than can be > >> achieved > > by a 200 > >> pixel survey box. > >> > >> A scenario I'd propose is to arrange something where we: > >> 1. allow the full-descent into sysadmin rant, where people feel > > comfortable to air > >> each and every grievance they've had with any part of OpenStack, > > recording all of > >> this (in a manipulable, written format minus > >> cursing) > >> 2. refuel our sysadmins with [beverage], while a small team attempts > >> to > > wrangle the > >> mass of comment into something that can be discussed 3. bring back in > > the fearless > >> operators, then have a more structured discussion about which items > >> are > > really the > >> big ones - and dive deeper into those so a full understanding is had > >> of > > use- > >> cases/'whys'/'whats' > >> > >> > >> at the conclusion of this session, we clean it up a bit and can pass > >> it > > on to our super- > >> awesome "developers", who probably haven't had time to make it to > >> this > > multi-hour > >> session, but will subsequently bow in awe of all of the awesome > > suggestions and > >> people who love their work :) > >> > >> For thoroughness, this passing-to could happen at session-per-program > >> as suggested, or in some other asynchronous way. > >> > >> > >> Regards, > >> > >> > >> > >> Tom > >> > >> > >>> > >>> > >>> Tim > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> *From:*Joe Gordon [mailto:joe.gord...@gmail.com] > >>> *Sent:* 16 December 2013 18:38 > >>> *To:* Tristan Goode > >>> *Cc:* openstack@lists.openstack.org > >>> *Subject:* Re: [Openstack] Bringing focus to the Operators and Users > >>> at the next summit > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> On Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 10:36 PM, Tristan Goode <tris...@aptira.com > >>> <mailto:tris...@aptira.com>> wrote: > >>> > >>> I'm trying to establish a feedback loop "because" we (Operators, > >>> Users, etc) > >>> need to better present our actual real world, evidence based > >>> Operator, User, > >>> > >>> and even other input like Sales and Marketing experiences back > >>> into the > >>> > >>> development teams. Much of this does and will come from the great > >>> work of > >>> the UC, the User surveys, and especially the folks that have > >>> volunteered to > >>> analyse the survey results. I'm hoping to build on the survey > >>> analysis and > >>> collaboratively and constructively focus that to present a > > blueprint or > >>> roadmap with a "whole of OpenStack" scope. We can dig deeper into > >>> the user > >>> survey feedback and break beyond the bounds of the limited format > > of the > >>> user survey to seed the discussion. For me, the most valuable > > session in > >>> Hong Kong was the discussion led by Tim of the user survey. It was > >>> however, > >>> all too short. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> Do you have any examples of what kind of feedback you would like to > >>> pass on to developers (I was unable to attend Tim's discussion of > >>> the user survey)? Also just playing devils advocate here, but why > >>> not use our bug system to provide feedback? > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>> From: Sean Dague [mailto:s...@dague.net <mailto:s...@dague.net>] > >>>> Sent: Saturday, 14 December 2013 3:02 AM > >>>> To: openstack@lists.openstack.org > >>> <mailto:openstack@lists.openstack.org> > >>>> Subject: Re: [Openstack] Bringing focus to the Operators and > > Users > >>> at the > >>>> next > >>>> summit > >>>> > >>>> So not that I don't think this is a worth while thing, because I > >>> think it > >>>> is. But instead > >>>> of jumping to the solution of a User Day, it might be useful to > >>> figure out > >>>> what's > >>>> attempting to be solved. > >>>> > >>>> Is it? > >>>> > >>>> 1) get Users together to share best practices among themselves? > >>> Because > >>>> lots of > >>>> people have learned things, and want to bootstrap others. > >>>> > >>>> 2) get Users and Operators together to share best practices > > among > >>>> themselves? > >>>> Because ... > >>>> > >>>> 3) get Vendors and Users and Operators together? Because ... > >>>> > >>>> 4) get Developers and Users and Operators together? Because .... > >>>> > >>>> I think if you start with defining the Because ... part, then > > the > >>> needed > >>>> parties, then > >>>> the odds of this being successful and useful to folks goes way > > up. > >>> It also > >>>> would give > >>>> people attending a reasonable expectation of what they are going > >>> to get > >>>> out of it. > >>>> > >>>> Because it would be a shame to set up #1, if most people thought > >>> they were > >>>> getting > >>>> #4 (which is basically what Lorin was proposing with his adopt a > >>> developer > >>>> idea), > >>>> then people being disappointed that they didn't get what they > >>> thought they > >>>> were > >>>> getting. > >>>> > >>>> The design summit works pretty well for the development > > community > >>> because > >>>> of > >>>> how narrowly it is scoped. So a critical mass in each of those > >>> rooms knows > >>>> when it's > >>>> getting off track and how to pull it back to something > > actionable > >>> at the > >>>> end. > >>>> > >>>> -Sean > >>>> > >>>> On 12/13/2013 06:05 AM, Tristan Goode wrote: > >>>>> I guess what I'm trying to say by "Users and Operators" covers > >>>>> carriers and telcos. By User I mean folks that consume > > OpenStack > >>>>> resources and by Operator I mean folks that supply OpenStack > >>>>> resources. Maybe all can be called Users but whatever one > > calls it, > >>>>> what I mean basically is Non-Developers actually working on > > and with > >>>>> OpenStack. :) > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Cheers > >>>>> > >>>>> Tristan > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> *From:*Kyle MacDonald [mailto:kyle.macdon...@gmail.com > >>> <mailto:kyle.macdon...@gmail.com> > >>>>> <mailto:kyle.macdon...@gmail.com > >> <mailto:kyle.macdon...@gmail.com>>] > >>>>> *Sent:* Thursday, 12 December 2013 7:02 PM > >>>>> *To:* Tristan Goode > >>>>> *Cc:* openstack@lists.openstack.org > >>> <mailto:openstack@lists.openstack.org> > >>>>> <mailto:openstack@lists.openstack.org > >>> <mailto:openstack@lists.openstack.org>> > >>>>> *Subject:* Re: [Openstack] Bringing focus to the Operators and > > Users > >>>>> at the next summit > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Tristan > >>>>> > >>>>> I like this idea and agree it should be a priority. I do > > suggest the > >>>>> focus area be expanded (or a second focus day) to accommodate > >>> carriers > >>>>> and telcos and their operations needs (they are real > > operators). > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> There is a ton of work being done by the leading telco's > > around NFV > >>>>> and SDN (many in emerging use cases) using OpenStack. I can > > very > >>>>> easily see "operations" being a killer issue and something > > that > >>> should > >>>>> be more broadly addressed. Last summit the forum for that > > track of > >>>>> discussions was by a vendor - next summit this area should be > > made > >>>>> more neutral and inclusive. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Kyle > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> On Dec 11, 2013, at 10:55 PM, Tristan Goode > > <tris...@aptira.com > >>> <mailto:tris...@aptira.com> > >>>>> <mailto:tris...@aptira.com <mailto:tris...@aptira.com>>> > > wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> G'day OpenStackLand, > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> I have an idea for the next summit to put forward... > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Like we have the various project design summit session > > days > >>> at the > >>>>> summits, I think it'd be really useful to have an > > Operators and > >>>>> Users day at the very start of the next summit (and > >>> hopefully all of > >>>>> them in future if it works out). So far at the last 4 > >>> summits I've > >>>>> attended, from the users and operators point of view we've > >>> had a rag > >>>>> tag bunch of disconnected panels and 40 minute sessions > > that > >>> really > >>>>> don't get anywhere much and don't make it to any sort of > > plan or > >>>>> worthwhile result. This proposed "Operators and Users" day > >>> will be > >>>>> run like the design summit session days where all of us > > that > >>> have to > >>>>> deal with the consequences of the software development of > > this > >>>>> project sit in a room and work the issues. The goal is to > >>> present > >>>>> real world, evidence based Operator, User, and even other > >>> input like > >>>>> Sales and Marketing experiences back into the development > > teams. > >>>>> Maybe we might even have our own "Operators and Users" > >>> lounge too. > >>>>> :-P > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Cheers > >>>>> > >>>>> Tristan > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>>> Mailing list: > >>>>> > > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack > >>>>> Post to : openstack@lists.openstack.org > >>> <mailto:openstack@lists.openstack.org> > >>>>> <mailto:openstack@lists.openstack.org > >>> <mailto:openstack@lists.openstack.org>> > >>>>> Unsubscribe : > >>>>> > > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>>> Mailing list: > >>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack > >>>>> Post to : openstack@lists.openstack.org > >>> <mailto:openstack@lists.openstack.org> > >>>>> Unsubscribe : > >>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> -- > >>>> Sean Dague > >>>> http://dague.net > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> Mailing list: > >>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack > >>> Post to : openstack@lists.openstack.org > >>> <mailto:openstack@lists.openstack.org> > >>> Unsubscribe : > >>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> Mailing list: > > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack > >>> Post to : openstack@lists.openstack.org > >>> Unsubscribe : > >>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack > >>> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Mailing list: > > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack > >> Post to : openstack@lists.openstack.org > >> Unsubscribe : > > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Mailing list: http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack > > Post to : openstack@lists.openstack.org > > Unsubscribe : > > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack _______________________________________________ Mailing list: http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack Post to : openstack@lists.openstack.org Unsubscribe : http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
