Re: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev] [ceilometer] virtual mid-cycle planning
On Fri, 26 Jun 2015, Chris Dent wrote: Ceilometer contributors and other interested parties, To keep people in the loop: The Ceilometer virtual mid-cycle will be held next week, the 9th and 10th of July. The schedule is being worked out. The topics that will be covered include: * Getting Gnocchi to a state of ProductionReady™ * Schematisation of notifications * Requirements to make the split of alarming into own repo effective * Requirements to make the split of collecting into own repo effective * Plans for handling deletion or deprecation of old from repo splits * Event-based alarming * Exploring what an APIv3 will mean * Getting a move on with in-tree functional testing The timetable will be available early next week but the overall picture is that the window of events will be in the range of early morning to late evening Euro-time. Some topics will have two sessions, one on each day. The hosting technology plan is to start with Hangouts and then fall back to Bluejeans and then IRC as each inevitably fails... Everyone is welcome. More details early next week. -- Chris Dent tw:@anticdent freenode:cdent https://tank.peermore.com/tanks/cdent___ OpenStack-operators mailing list OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
Re: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev] [ceilometer] virtual mid-cycle planning
The voting related to the ceilometer mid-cylce is now closed. Prad and I will work to come up with a proposed schedule. Some general comments: As there is limited time not all topics proposed will be addressed. To maximize value for the sessions that got an above average number of votes, we will be cutting off the topics that did not with some severity. For those topics for which was a small number of votes it may be worthwhile for people to arrange their own small meetings with other interested parties. Just because a topic isn't going to be on the schedule that doesn't mean it is not important, it simply means that the right people weren't paying attention in the past few days. They may be later. Unfortunately when building the schedule we will be unable to accomodate concurrent sessions because of the small number of participants (everyone wants to go to the same stuff). It's looking like, based on the voting, we should go for 3 days, with the third day being an optional sprint day. Some topics are broad enough that having a session on day 1 (to figure out what matters) and day 2 (do something about it) probably makes sense. The primary zone of time overlap is the Euro-afternoon, followed by the Euro-morning. Thank you to those of you who are not local to Europe who were willing to stretch a bit to make the scheduling a bit easier. Topics will need leaders. Visit the relevant etherpads to find the summary information and links to a planning spreadsheet and volunteer to lead if you like. -- Chris Dent tw:@anticdent freenode:cdent https://tank.peermore.com/tanks/cdent ___ OpenStack-operators mailing list OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
Re: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev] [ceilometer] virtual mid-cycle planning
On Thu, 2 Jul 2015, Chris Dent wrote: The voting related to the ceilometer mid-cylce is now closed. Prad and I will work to come up with a proposed schedule. Can interested participants please make sure they are up to date on http://doodle.com/6vfksdu38wcwqqd3 with two consecutive days where they can be present (obviously ignore the dates that have already passed). If you can't do two consecutive days, that's okay, we'll try to put the stuff you care about on the day you can be around. Thanks. -- Chris Dent tw:@anticdent freenode:cdent https://tank.peermore.com/tanks/cdent ___ OpenStack-operators mailing list OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
Re: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev] [ceilometer] virtual mid-cycle planning
On Fri, 26 Jun 2015, Chris Dent wrote: Ceilometer contributors and other interested parties, It's been pointed out that the topic titles at https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/ceilometer-liberty-midcycle and the agenda items and descriptions at https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/ceilometer-liberty-midcycle-agenda are a bit sparse and thus it is hard to decide if you want to be interested in a session or not. The use of etherpads here is intentional: If you have knowledge about the topic or questions that you think need to be asked put them on the etherpad. Prad and I are facilitating the orchestrating of choosing the agenda _not_ defining it. The defining needs to be done as a group. If no one steps up to define a topic then it is pretty clear we don't need to talk about that one. So: If you care about a topic, get in there on https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/ceilometer-liberty-midcycle-agenda and write something about it. Also please keep in mind that not all topics will be addressed. Only those topics for which there is demonstrated interested, sufficient quorum and sufficient time overlap will be addressed. Thanks. -- Chris Dent tw:@anticdent freenode:cdent https://tank.peermore.com/tanks/cdent ___ OpenStack-operators mailing list OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
Re: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev] [ceilometer] virtual mid-cycle planning
On Sun, 28 Jun 2015, Nadya Shakhat wrote: What is the workflow of adding a new topic? I suggest to add it to both [1] and [2]. Very good question and great idea. I agree that both is the way to go, but I would suggest that we keep the entry on the voting page[2] as just a title and make the addition on the agenda page[1] be in whatever form is useful. Including description, open questions and leader/initiator is all great if we know that information but I think for a lot of these topics there's a general sense of we need to talk about this topic and that's about it. Where we know the details we should put them, where we don't we will figure it out later. We don't want to get in the situation where we are avoiding topics that are vague because those are the ones we most need to talk about. [1] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/ceilometer-liberty-midcycle-agenda [2] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/ceilometer-liberty-midcycle. -- Chris Dent tw:@anticdent freenode:cdent https://tank.peermore.com/tanks/cdent ___ OpenStack-operators mailing list OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
Re: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev] [ceilometer] virtual mid-cycle planning
On Fri, 26 Jun 2015, Chris Dent wrote: Please provide your input soon. We will close the voting at the end of Wednesday, July 3rd and will be posting a proposed schedule soon thereafter. Note that due to time constraints the mid-cycle could happen as soon as the following Monday, July 6th. Sigh, I can't read my calendar. The voting will stop at the end of Wednesday, July 1st. -- Chris Dent tw:@anticdent freenode:cdent https://tank.peermore.com/tanks/cdent ___ OpenStack-operators mailing list OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
