Hi everyone,
The Product WG is finalizing our mid-cycle plans and I wanted to confirm
the conclusion of this thread to bring into that discussion...
Reviewing the numerous responses here, it seems like the majority opted for
option #1 (one 'official' ops mid-cycle but not precluding regional ones
On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 4:24 PM, Erik McCormick
wrote:
> > 2) More technically we'll need to address the challenge of local
> > sound, how to we ensure all the mostly spontaious talk in a large work
> > session makes it to remote participants. Passing a mic is a bit
> > cumbersome and hard to en
On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 4:08 PM, Jonathan D. Proulx wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 03:44:03PM -0500, Erik McCormick wrote:
> :I'm still fishing for more specific details, but here is a snapshot of
> :how the Ceph Development Summit is handled.
> :
> :http://tracker.ceph.com/projects/ceph/wiki/CD
On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 03:44:03PM -0500, Erik McCormick wrote:
:I'm still fishing for more specific details, but here is a snapshot of
:how the Ceph Development Summit is handled.
:
:http://tracker.ceph.com/projects/ceph/wiki/CDS_Jewel
:
:It was previously done via Google Hangouts, but is now done
I'm still fishing for more specific details, but here is a snapshot of
how the Ceph Development Summit is handled.
http://tracker.ceph.com/projects/ceph/wiki/CDS_Jewel
It was previously done via Google Hangouts, but is now done using
Bluejeans. This is interesting especially since I believe Bluej
I agree with all of the points that are being raised, but the inverse has
been true for most of the European operators at every other midcycle. And
the same presumably applies to the Asian operators. As OpenStack goes
global, we need to find ways of bringing all those voices into the
conversation.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 11/17/15 1:34 PM, Matt Jarvis wrote:
> From my perspective we're happy to put in place anything that we
> can reasonably do, and that will increase participation. Bear in
> mind that we don't have massive amounts of money or people - the
> costs o
>From my perspective we're happy to put in place anything that we can
reasonably do, and that will increase participation. Bear in mind that we
don't have massive amounts of money or people - the costs of the event as
it stands is just about covered by the sponsors we have, and I'm putting
most of
welcome. If not, we can certainly post
>> to their list and ask for suggestions. I imagine Sage might pipe up
>> with some interesting thoughts at the very least.
>>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > From: tadow...@gmail.com [mailto:tadow...@gmail.co
On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 11:45 AM, Erik McCormick wrote:
> We're deciding not to innovate a solution to allow people to
> participate in a group that is attempting to provide innovative ideas.
> How ironic. I actually don't think it would require much innovation.
> The Ceph guys run their entire d
we can certainly post
> to their list and ask for suggestions. I imagine Sage might pipe up
> with some interesting thoughts at the very least.
>
> >
> >
> >
> > From: tadow...@gmail.com [mailto:tadow...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Matt
> > Fischer
> > Sent: Tuesday, N
>
>
> We're deciding not to innovate a solution to allow people to
> participate in a group that is attempting to provide innovative ideas.
> How ironic. I actually don't think it would require much innovation.
> The Ceph guys run their entire design summit remotely, and I'm certain
> that it way b
nt: Tuesday, November 17, 2015 10:48 AM
> To: Donald Talton
> Cc: Joe Topjian; Jonathan Proulx; openstack-operators@lists.openstack.org
> Subject: Re: [Openstack-operators] OPs Midcycle location discussion.
>
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 1:00 PM, Donald Talton
> wrote:
>
&g
@lists.openstack.org
Subject: Re: [Openstack-operators] OPs Midcycle location discussion.
On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 1:00 PM, Donald Talton
mailto:donaldtal...@fico.com>> wrote:
I’ll +1 option 1 too, if we can get remote participation that would suffice.
Having been to several of these I think t
Following up to what Matt said, even for the service (nova, cinder, etc)
mid-cycles I've been in, typically only 1 or 2 folks participate remotely
and they make sure to have someone pay attention/alert them when their
topics are coming up. I don't think remote/virtual scales beyond 1-2 remote
parti
On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 1:00 PM, Donald Talton
wrote:
> I’ll +1 option 1 too, if we can get remote participation that would
> suffice.
>
>
>
Having been to several of these I think that we can call remote
participation a stretch goal at best, and if I'm being honest, I just don't
think it's going
result from each
> meeting, that would be ideal.
> >
> >-Original Message-
> >From: Edgar Magana [mailto:edgar.mag...@workday.com]
> >Sent: Monday, November 16, 2015 9:10 AM
> >To: Donald Talton; Jonathan Proulx;
> openstack-operators@lists.openstack.org
> >
On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 10:14 AM, Shamail wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> On Nov 16, 2015, at 7:01 PM, Jonathan Proulx wrote:
>>
>>
>> Let me restate the question a bit as I think I'm hearing two different
>> responses that may be getting conflated.
>>
>> Option 1: There's a single Ops Midcycle that shifts ar
On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 11:01 AM, Jonathan Proulx wrote:
>
> Let me restate the question a bit as I think I'm hearing two different
> responses that may be getting conflated.
>
> Option 1: There's a single Ops Midcycle that shifts around and we
> look at ways to increase remote participation. (o
I’ll +1 option 1 too, if we can get remote participation that would suffice.
From: Joe Topjian [mailto:j...@topjian.net]
Sent: Monday, November 16, 2015 12:57 PM
To: Jonathan Proulx
Cc: openstack-operators@lists.openstack.org
Subject: Re: [Openstack-operators] OPs Midcycle location discussion
+1 Option 1
On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 10:01 AM, Jonathan Proulx wrote:
>
> Let me restate the question a bit as I think I'm hearing two different
> responses that may be getting conflated.
>
> Option 1: There's a single Ops Midcycle that shifts around and we
> look at ways to increase remote part
:
>> :From: Matt Jarvis > matt.jar...@datacentred.co.uk>>
>> :Date: Monday, November 16, 2015 at 9:23 AM
>> :To: Jonathan Proulx mailto:j...@csail.mit.edu>>
>> :Cc: "openstack-operators@lists.openstack.org> openstack-operators@lists.openstack.o
en
:> :
:> :
:> :From: Matt Jarvis matt.jar...@datacentred.co.uk>>
:> :Date: Monday, November 16, 2015 at 9:23 AM
:> :To: Jonathan Proulx mailto:j...@csail.mit.edu>>
:> :Cc: "openstack-operators@lists.openstack.org openstack-operators@lists.openstack.org>"
t result from each meeting,
>that would be ideal.
>
>-Original Message-
>From: Edgar Magana [mailto:edgar.mag...@workday.com]
>Sent: Monday, November 16, 2015 9:10 AM
>To: Donald Talton; Jonathan Proulx; openstack-operators@lists.openstack.org
>Subject: Re: [Openstack-oper
Matt Jarvis matt.jar...@datacentred.co.uk>>
> :Date: Monday, November 16, 2015 at 9:23 AM
> :To: Jonathan Proulx mailto:j...@csail.mit.edu>>
> :Cc: "openstack-operators@lists.openstack.org openstack-operators@lists.openstack.org>" <
> openstack-operat
Hi,
> On Nov 16, 2015, at 7:01 PM, Jonathan Proulx wrote:
>
>
> Let me restate the question a bit as I think I'm hearing two different
> responses that may be getting conflated.
>
> Option 1: There's a single Ops Midcycle that shifts around and we
> look at ways to increase remote participati
:
>:From: Matt Jarvis
>mailto:matt.jar...@datacentred.co.uk>>
>:Date: Monday, November 16, 2015 at 9:23 AM
>:To: Jonathan Proulx mailto:j...@csail.mit.edu>>
>:Cc:
>"openstack-operators@lists.openstack.org<mailto:openstack-operators@lists.
>openstack.o
o:matt.jar...@datacentred.co.uk>>
:Date: Monday, November 16, 2015 at 9:23 AM
:To: Jonathan Proulx mailto:j...@csail.mit.edu>>
:Cc:
"openstack-operators@lists.openstack.org<mailto:openstack-operators@lists.openstack.org>"
mailto:openstack-operators@lists.openstack.org>>
:Sub
Let me restate the question a bit as I think I'm hearing two different
responses that may be getting conflated.
Option 1: There's a single Ops Midcycle that shifts around and we
look at ways to increase remote participation. (obviously this doesn't
preclude other meetups)
Option 2: There are mu
ack-operators@lists.openstack.org>>
Subject: Re: [Openstack-operators] OPs Midcycle location discussion.
+1 from me, although I am admittedly biased ;) Personally I think the wider
participation in the ops feedback loop can only be a positive thing, and there
are definitely different p
+1 from me, although I am admittedly biased ;) Personally I think the wider
participation in the ops feedback loop can only be a positive thing, and
there are definitely different perspectives and concerns to be had from
European operators given the different commercial landscape. I'm sure the
same
k.org
Subject: Re: [Openstack-operators] OPs Midcycle location discussion.
I am in the same position that Donald here. It is hard to justify that trip,
however I believe we can multiple Ops Meet-ups around the world without
expecting an official one.
As long as during the meet-up the feedba
t;From: Jonathan Proulx [mailto:j...@csail.mit.edu]
>Sent: Monday, November 16, 2015 8:51 AM
>To: openstack-operators@lists.openstack.org
>Subject: [Openstack-operators] OPs Midcycle location discussion.
>
>Hi All,
>
>1st User Committee IRC meeting will be today at 19:00UTC on
>#o
8:51 AM
To: openstack-operators@lists.openstack.org
Subject: [Openstack-operators] OPs Midcycle location discussion.
Hi All,
1st User Committee IRC meeting will be today at 19:00UTC on #openstack-meeting,
we haven't exactly settled on an agenda yet but I hope to raise this issue
the...
I
I thought we were working toward a regional approach rather than
having an "official" single meetup. Are you proposing to scrap the
North America meetup entirely? What does official vs. unofficial
entail?
-Erik
On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 10:50 AM, Jonathan Proulx wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> 1st User Commi
Hi All,
1st User Committee IRC meeting will be today at 19:00UTC on
#openstack-meeting, we haven't exactly settled on an agenda yet but I
hope to raise this issue the...
It has been suggested that we make the February 15-16 European Ops
Meetup in Manchester UK [1] the 'official' OPs Midcycle. Pr
36 matches
Mail list logo
