On 03/01/2016 03:52 PM, Clint Byrum wrote:
Excerpts from Eoghan Glynn's message of 2016-03-01 02:08:00 -0800:
There are a whole slew of folks who work fulltime on OpenStack but
contribute mainly in the background: operating clouds, managing
engineering teams, supporting customers, designing product roadmaps,
training new users etc. TBH we should be flattered that the design
summit sessions are interesting and engaging enough to also attract
some of that sort of audience, as well as the core contributors of
code. If those interested folks happen to also have the gumption to
earn an ATC pass by meeting the threshold for contributor activity,
then good for them! As long as no-one is actively derailing the
discussion, I don't see much of an issue with the current mix of
attendees.
I think you're right on all of these points. However, what you might
not have considered is that _the sheer number of people in the room_
can derail the productivity of a group of developers arguing complicated
points. It's not that we want to be operating in the shadows; it is that
we want to be operating in a safe, creative environment. A room with 5
friends, 5 acquaintances, and 100 strangers, is not that. But if there
are only, say, 15 strangers, one can take the time to get to know those
people, to understand their needs, and make far more progress and be
far more inclusive in discussions.
What we want is for people to be attending and participating _on
purpose_.
I think it's pretty unlikely that people would attend the developer summit
sessions by accident. :)
It kind of sounds to me like you want to limit the number of 'tourists' that
aren't actively involved in the issues being discussed, but are just there to
observe. Or am I misinterpreting?
Chris
__________________________________________________________________________
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
