On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 11:48 AM, Joe Gordon <joe.gord...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 9:20 AM, Anne Gentle <a...@openstack.org> wrote: > >> >> >> On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 10:53 AM, Joe Gordon <joe.gord...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 4:01 AM, Thierry Carrez <thie...@openstack.org> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Jay Pipes wrote: >>>> > On 10/29/2014 09:07 PM, Russell Bryant wrote: >>>> >> On 10/29/2014 06:46 PM, Rochelle Grober wrote: >>>> >>> Any chance we could use the opening to move either the Refstack >>>> >>> session or the logging session from their current joint (and >>>> >>> conflicting) time (15:40)? QA really would be appreciated at both. >>>> >>> And I'd really like to be at both. I'd say the Refstack one would >>>> go >>>> >>> better in the debug slot, as the API stuff is sort of related to the >>>> >>> logging. Switching with one of the 14:50 sessions might also work. >>>> >>> >>>> >>> Just hoping. I really want great participation at all of these >>>> >>> sessions. >>>> >> >>>> >> The "gate debugging" session is most likely going to be dropped at >>>> this >>>> >> point. I don't see a big problem with moving the refstack one to >>>> that >>>> >> slot (the first time). >>>> >> >>>> >> Anyone else have a strong opinion on this? >>>> > >>>> > Sounds good to me. >>>> >>>> Sounds good. >>>> >>> >>> With the "gate debugging" session being dropped due to being the wrong >>> format to be productive, we now need a new session. After looking over the >>> etherpad of proposed cross project sessions I think there is one glaring >>> omission: the SDK. In the "Kilo Cycle Goals Exercise" thread [0] having a >>> real SDK was one of the top answers. Many folks had great responses that >>> clearly explained the issues end users are having [1]. As for who could >>> lead a session like this I have two ideas: Monty Taylor, who had one of the >>> most colorful explanations to why this is so critical, or Dean Troyer, one >>> of the few people actually working on this right now. I think it would be >>> embarrassing if we had no cross project session on SDKs, since there >>> appears to be a consensus that the making life easier for the end user is a >>> high priority. >>> >>> >> There are many discussion sessions related to SDKs, they just aren't all >> in the cross-project slots. Plus these don't require an ATC badge >> (something users may not have). >> > > If we want to make sure the end user has a more uniform experience, having > the individual python-*client discussions isn't sufficient. > > Also, the issue is not lack of user feedback, the issue here is more of a > lack of people implementing the feedback. > Agreed, so a cross-project session may help with that. Still, non-ATCs may want to pick up this work and just don't know how. I'd like to see ATC at the Ecosystem sessions to help with that direction of contribution. I know we need this session, just trying to find a place. > > >> Application Ecosystem Working Group >> >> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Application_Ecosystem_Working_Group >> >> Monday 2:30 (Degas) >> >> Thursday 1:40 (Hyatt) >> > > These sessions have pretty broad scopes, and I don't think a discussion on > SDKs here is enough, since the issue isn't a lack of feedback. > Okay, fair enough. > > >> I think we can talk about the real SDK at one of these. >> >> There's also: >> >> Getting Started with the OpenStack Python SDK >> >> Monday 4:20 (Room 242AB) >> > This isn't a a design summit session, so it doesn't really make sense to > do future design work here. > Agreed, was just making sure people on this list are aware. Anne > > >> Anne >> >> The current catch is, the free slot is now at 15:40, so it would compete >>> with 'How to Tackle Technical Debt in Kilo,' a session which I expect to be >>> very popular with the same people who would be interested in attending a >>> SDK session. >>> >>> [0] >>> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2014-September/044766.html >>> [1] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/6cWQG9oNsr >>> >>> >>>> -- >>>> Thierry Carrez (ttx) >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> OpenStack-dev mailing list >>>> OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org >>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >>>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> OpenStack-dev mailing list >>> OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org >>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> OpenStack-dev mailing list >> OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > >
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev