The operator summit is about hearing from the operators and allowing them to exchange information (solutions, observations, complaints...) and provide input to the devs. I feel it is best to hear from as many operators as possible. Therefore the size of the summit should not be limited. A venue should be selected that's big enough to accommodate 2x of the participation in Philadelphia (might need 3x). The registration process needs to start asap so that we can get an idea how big the interest will be and to allow for participants to make travel arrangements.
+1 for no booths etc. +1 for free admission or very small fee Best, Ulf -------------------- VP, Cloud Operations, HP Cloud Tel +1-510-599-9890 On Jul 5, 2015, at 1:41 AM, Dave Walker <em...@daviey.com<mailto:em...@daviey.com>> wrote: I've never worked with an organisation that would willingly pay for a ticket if there were free ones on the table, the ones often included in sponsorship deals are even used first. Just the idea of splitting by those that 'can' expense it seems odd to me. There must surely be some sort of other recognition? -- Kind Regards, Dave Walker On 5 Jul 2015 7:57 am, "Mark Atwood" <mark.atw...@hp.com<mailto:mark.atw...@hp.com>> wrote: As a suggestion re free / paid registration: have tiered tickets, like the Community Leadership Summit does. Having a free ticket vs a paid ticket would not grant more or less access or privileges at the event, but gives the opportunity for people who can expense a ticket to do so. -- Mark Atwood <mark.atw...@hp.com<mailto:mark.atw...@hp.com>> Director of Open Source Engagement, Hewlett-Packard +1-206-473-7118<tel:%2B1-206-473-7118> On Tue, Jun 30, 2015, at 09:04, matt wrote: +1 on the no booths rule. -1 on paid registration, I think we need to be mindful of the smaller openstack deployers, their voice is an important one, and their access to the larger operations teams is invaluable to them. I like the idea of local teams showing up because it's in the neighborhood and they don't need to hassle their budgeting managers too much for travel approval / expenses. This is more accessible currently than the summits for many operators. Let's keep it that way. -matt _______________________________________________ OpenStack-operators mailing list OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org<mailto:OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators _______________________________________________ OpenStack-operators mailing list OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org<mailto:OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators _______________________________________________ OpenStack-operators mailing list OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
