I love this idea tim. On Dec 20, 2013 2:00 PM, "Tim Bell" <tim.b...@cern.ch> wrote:
> > How about we do a mid-summit user/operator boot camp (like the programs > do, i.e. February or so) where: > > - we get some operators and users (i.e. those that run and those that > consume) OpenStack together > - we describe our pain points (as Tom would say > curse/desk-slam/white-board) > - we prepare a set of blueprints and corresponding representatives to > explain them to the development community > - we identify cross-project issues and take them to the TC > > My experience is that there is significant overlap between us all so it is > not necessary to have everyone there, especially if we solicit input before > through the ambassadors etc. > > Tim > > On 20 Dec 2013, at 07:55, Tristan Goode <tris...@aptira.com> wrote: > > > 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 > > > _______________________________________________ > 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
