On 02/22/2016 06:49 PM, Matt Fischer wrote: > On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 11:51 AM, Tim Bell <tim.b...@cern.ch> wrote: > >> >> >> >> >> >> On 22/02/16 17:27, "John Garbutt" <j...@johngarbutt.com> wrote: >> >>> On 22 February 2016 at 15:31, Monty Taylor <mord...@inaugust.com> wrote: >>>> On 02/22/2016 07:24 AM, Russell Bryant wrote: >>>>> On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 10:14 AM, Thierry Carrez < >> thie...@openstack.org >>>>>> <mailto:thie...@openstack.org>> wrote: >>>>>> Hi everyone, >>>>>> TL;DR: Let's split the events, starting after Barcelona. >>>>> This proposal sounds fantastic. Thank you very much to those that help >>>>> put it together. >>>> Totally agree. I think it's an excellent way to address the concerns and >>>> balance all of the diverse needs we have. >>> >>> tl;dr >>> +1 >>> Awesome work ttx. >>> Thank you! >>> >>> Cheaper cities & venues should make it easier for more contributors to >>> attend. Thats a big deal. This also feels like enough notice to plan >>> for that. >>> >>> I think this means summit talk proposal deadline is both after the >>> previous release, and after the contributor event for the next >>> release? That should help keep proposals concrete (less guess work >>> when submitting). Nice. >>> >>> Dev wise, it seems equally good timing. Initially I was worried about >>> the event distracting from RC bugs, but actually I can see this >>> helping. >>> >>> I am sure there are more questions that will pop up. Like I assume >>> this means there is no ATC free pass to the summit? And I guess a >>> small nominal fee for the contributor meetup (like the recent ops >>> meetup, to help predict numbers of accurately)? I guess that helps >>> level the playing field for contributors who don't put git commits in >>> the repo (I am thinking vocal operators that don't contribute code). >>> But I probably shouldn't go into all that just yet. >> >> I would like to find a way to allow contributors cheaper access to the >> summits. Many of the devOPS contributors are patching test cases, >> configuration management recipes and documentation which should be rewarded >> in some form. >> >> Assuming that many of the ATCs are not so motivated to attend the summit, >> the cost in offering access to the event would not be significant. >> >> Charging for the Ops meetups was, to my understanding, more to confirm >> commitment to attend given limited space. >> >> Thus, I would be in favour of a preferential rate for contributors >> (whether ATC is the right criteria is a different question) for summits. >> >> >> Tim > > > I believe this is already the case. Unless I'm mistaken contributing to a > big tent config management project like the openstack puppet modules or > chef counts for ATC. I'm not sure if osad is big tent but if so it would > also count. Test cases and Docs also already count.
Contributions to any project listed in this file counts toward ATC status: http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/governance/tree/reference/projects.yaml Thank you, Anita. > > > > __________________________________________________________________________ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
