Thanks Edgar. I look forward to the draft document!
> On May 20, 2016, at 11:27 AM, Edgar Magana <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hello Shamail and Team, > > Thank you so much to clarify the current progress and the work in progress. > Please, keep the hard work. Next week the UC will share with you and the rest > of the WGs and Teams a document where we want to share with the board of > directors to have a better alignment as User Committee with the rest of the > OpenStack Governance. This is why I wanted to be sure we have a good set of > milestones to be completed for this team. > > Thanks, > > Edgar > > From: Shamail <[email protected]> > Date: Thursday, May 19, 2016 at 4:19 PM > To: Edgar Magana <[email protected]> > Cc: "[email protected]" > <[email protected]>, > "[email protected]" > <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [Openstack-operators] [recognition] Non-ATC Recognition WG > Meeting Today (5/12/2016) > > Hi Edgar, > > On May 19, 2016, at 7:00 PM, Edgar Magana <[email protected]> wrote: > > Shamail and Team, > > Where are we I defining the activities for recognizing OpenStack Users? In my > mind we have completed the definition and we agreed on: > AUC – Active User Contributor > We encourage the following activities: > Organizers of any of the groups.openstack.org > Active members and contributors to Functional Teams and/or Working Groups. > Operators meet-up moderator > Contributing to any repository under the UC governance (i.e. os-ops and user > stories) > Track chairs for OpenStack Summits > Contributors to superuser (articles, interviews, user stories, etc.) > Active moderators on ask.openstack > If all this make sense, Do we still need to have this WG? > > We have agreed on the contributors for phase 1 of the user-committee > constituency and we are currently working on milestone-3 which is to define > the metrics (and methods used to collect metrics) associated with the given > activities. > > We have a few more milestones remaining[1] which concludes with us wrapping > up the findings and sharing them with the user committee. > > I think it still makes sense for the working group to exist (for now) since > we still need to formulate how we will capture the necessary metrics to > validate that an individual meets the requirements for one of the roles > mentioned by you. We are also thinking about how to automate data collection > and possibly integrate these metrics with Stackalytics (longer term) to give > credit via that tool. > > Please let me know if pursuing the remaining milestones make sense since we > started the WG to help meet objectives given to us by the user committee. > > [1] > https://wiki.openstack.org/w/index.php?title=NonATCRecognition&mobileaction=toggle_view_desktop#Milestones > > Thanks, > Shamail > > > Thanks, > > Edgar > > From: Shamail <[email protected]> > Date: Thursday, May 12, 2016 at 9:04 AM > To: "[email protected]" > <[email protected]>, > "[email protected]" > <[email protected]> > Subject: [Openstack-operators] [recognition] Non-ATC Recognition WG Meeting > Today (5/12/2016) > > Hi everyone, > > > > The Non-ATC Recognition WG will be meeting today and the agenda has been > posted on our wiki[1]. The team will be reviewing the results from working > session in Austin in today's meeting. > > > > Meeting information: > Date: 5/12 > Time: 1900 UTC > IRC Channel: #openstack-meeting-3 > > > > [1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/NonATCRecognition > > Thank you, > Shamail
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-operators mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
