I think these are some very thoughtful ideas on how to ensure users are influencing the roadmap (among other goals).
I do wonder if it would make sense to gather user feedback and goals before the summit, like the day (or week) before, to help provide some priorities (from their perspective) to consider going into the summit. Maybe it's an online meeting/webinar (meeting burner is a nice hybrid) led by the user committee and a meetup Sunday night before the summit kicks off to review. Then we throw the top 5 priorities up on the screens in every summit session as a reminder. These are just a few ideas, I'm sure as the user committee forms they will take the ones that make sense. On Jul 26, 2012, at 5:43 PM, "Lloyd Dewolf" <[email protected]> wrote: > Oops, I meant to fork the thread. > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Lloyd Dewolf <[email protected]> > Date: Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 1:35 PM > Subject: Re: [Openstack] [nova] [cinder] Nova-volume vs. Cinder in Folsom > To: [email protected] > > > On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 9:08 AM, Thierry Carrez <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Using the "user committee" setup, you don't really need to take >> authority away from the PTL. You increase the influence of the "users" >> on technical decisions. You just provide a clear and official mechanism >> to represent the interests of "the users" as a whole. Once you have >> that, if the PTL or technical committee decides to ignore it, it's a >> rather strong decision that better has to be well justified. Its better >> than having some arbitrary percentage of "users" in a single committee >> and then have most decisions won by the most largely represented party. >> >> If the user committee is an active and respected group, it provides nice >> checks and balances against developers living in developer bubbles. Most >> issues we have right now with deployer-friendliness are linked to the >> fact that "the users" don't have a clear or official voice. >> >> The trick is, of course, to manage to set up such a committee in a way >> that represents all the users and deployers. It will be all the more >> influential if it is seen as representing all the users, rather than >> just a loosely-tied pre-determined subset of large users. > > I generally agree with your thoughts around a "user committee". > > > For my benefit, I'd love to get a feel for what we're doing to make > development user friendly? > > > In my fantasies for the Grizzly release it would start something like: > > A. Grizzly Summit > > B. From the summit the Tech Committee & PTL have community consensus > on the overarching goal for the release and the projects' goals. > Articulated online in user friendly manner. > > C. Webinar / OpenStack User Groups get a presentation on the release > goals, and channels for input and participation. > > D. About the half way point in release schedule, development adjusts > the online communication to reflect reality, presents an update, and > again channels for input and participation. > > > How do things work today? I haven't found much in the wiki. > > > Thanks, > -- > @lloyddewolf > http://www.pistoncloud.com/ > > > -- > -- > @lloyddewolf > http://www.pistoncloud.com/ > > _______________________________________________ > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack > Post to : [email protected] > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
