Why just the one summit? Each cycle has a PTG and a summit, which makes 4 
events per year.


From: "Steven Dake (stdake)" <<>>
Reply-To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" 
Date: Wednesday, October 12, 2016 at 3:25 PM
To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" 
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] PTG from the Ops Perspective - a few short notes


RE 3 - I do understand purpose of PTGs.   Prior many engineering orgs didn't 
send many people to midcycles (where a lot of work got done - more so than 
summit even).  The 3 events are 2 PTGS + 1 summit (although I don't know the 
length of the PTGs)


From: Clint Byrum <<>>
Reply-To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" 
Date: Wednesday, October 12, 2016 at 12:51 AM
To: openstack-dev 
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] PTG from the Ops Perspective - a few short notes

Excerpts from Steven Dake (stdake)'s message of 2016-10-12 06:42:43 +0000:
No flame, just observation about the reality of these changes.
I think we missed this communication on the mailing list or in the FAQs or 
somewhere else.  I think most engineering-focused organizations are looking at 
the PTGs only and not really considering the summit for budget planning.  If 
folks knew the operators were only going to be at the OpenStack Summit, I think 
that may change budget planning for engineering organizations.  Seems like more 
siloing to me, not less.  We need to integrate OpenStack's development with 
Operators as well as the Operator's customers (the cloud consumers the 
Operators deliver to).
Does the foundation not want to co-locate the ops summit at the PTG because the 
ops summit feeds into the OpenStack Summit main ops day(s)?

Agree, on the surface it looks like this adds a brick or two on top of
the existing wall that devs throw things over.

However, I think the reality is those bricks were already there, and
we've all been pretending this isn't what is already happening.

So, while I do want to make sure enough of our architects and designers
go to the summit to truly understand user needs, I also think it has
been proven ineffective to also throw all of the coders into that mix and
expect them to be productive.

I recall many of us huddled in the dev pit and at parties at summits
trying desperately to have deep technical conversations while the
maelstrom was happening around us. And then the few who were fortunate
enough to go to the mid-cycle would get into quiet rooms for a few days,
and _actually_ design the things our users need, but 3 months late,
and basically for the next release.

I don't have any easy solutions for this problem, but the expectation that 
project developers are required at 3 week-long events instead of 2 wasn't 
clearly communicated and should be rectified beyond a post to the openstack-dev 
mailing list where most people filter messages by tags (i.e. your message is 
probably not reaching the correct audience).

Where did you get three?

PTG - write code, design things (replaces mid-cycles)
Summit - listen to users, showcase designs, state plans for next release

OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)

Rackspace Limited is a company registered in England & Wales (company 
registered number 03897010) whose registered office is at 5 Millington Road, 
Hyde Park Hayes, Middlesex UB3 4AZ. Rackspace Limited privacy policy can be 
viewed at - This e-mail message may 
contain confidential or privileged information intended for the recipient. Any 
dissemination, distribution or copying of the enclosed material is prohibited. 
If you receive this transmission in error, please notify us immediately by 
e-mail at and delete the original message. Your cooperation 
is appreciated.
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)

Reply via email to