+1 On Dec 20, 2013, at 11:46 AM, 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
