Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On 2016-02-29 15:03:19 -0800 (-0800), James Bottomley wrote: [...] > it sounds like an an expectation that people who aren't gamers > would submit more than one patch and, indeed, become part of the > developer base. I wanted to explain why there's a significant set > of people who legitimately

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On Wed, Mar 02, 2016 at 04:11:48PM +, Alexis Lee wrote: :Walter A. Boring IV said on Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 11:47:16AM -0800: :> I'm trying to follow this here. If we want all of the projects in :> the same location to hold a design summit, then all of the :> contributors are still going to

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

Walter A. Boring IV said on Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 11:47:16AM -0800: > I'm trying to follow this here. If we want all of the projects in > the same location to hold a design summit, then all of the > contributors are still going to have to do international travel, > which is the primary cost for

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

After reading through this, it seems to me like Anita is frustrated with the motivation among those who submit one patch because of her perception that they are doing so only to take advantage of a free ticket and by extension, crowding rooms that affects her ability to hear/engage effectively. I

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On 03/01/2016 03:52 PM, Clint Byrum wrote: Excerpts from Eoghan Glynn's message of 2016-03-01 02:08:00 -0800: There are a whole slew of folks who work fulltime on OpenStack but contribute mainly in the background: operating clouds, managing engineering teams, supporting customers, designing

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On 03/01/2016 04:30 PM, Chris Friesen wrote: > On 03/01/2016 09:03 AM, Anita Kuno wrote: >> On 03/01/2016 05:08 AM, Eoghan Glynn wrote: > >> In Vancouver I happened to be sitting behind someone who stated "I'm >> just here for the buzz." Which is lovely for that person. The >> problem

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

Excerpts from Eoghan Glynn's message of 2016-03-01 02:08:00 -0800: > > > > Current thinking would be to give preferential rates to access the > > > main > > > summit to people who are present to other events (like this new > > > separated contributors-oriented event, or Ops

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On 03/01/2016 09:03 AM, Anita Kuno wrote: On 03/01/2016 05:08 AM, Eoghan Glynn wrote: In Vancouver I happened to be sitting behind someone who stated "I'm just here for the buzz." Which is lovely for that person. The problem is that the buzz that person is there for is partially created by me

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On 03/01/2016 05:08 AM, Eoghan Glynn wrote: > >>> Current thinking would be to give preferential rates to access the main >>> summit to people who are present to other events (like this new >>> separated contributors-oriented event, or Ops midcycle(s)). That would >>> allow for a

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

Le 01/03/2016 11:08, Eoghan Glynn a écrit : Current thinking would be to give preferential rates to access the main summit to people who are present to other events (like this new separated contributors-oriented event, or Ops midcycle(s)). That would allow for a wider definition of "active

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

> > Current thinking would be to give preferential rates to access the main > > summit to people who are present to other events (like this new > > separated contributors-oriented event, or Ops midcycle(s)). That would > > allow for a wider definition of "active community member"

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On 02/29/2016 06:17 PM, Eoghan Glynn wrote: > > > Current thinking would be to give preferential rates to access the main > summit to people who are present to other events (like this new > separated contributors-oriented event, or Ops midcycle(s)). That would > allow for a wider

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

> >>> Current thinking would be to give preferential rates to access the main > >>> summit to people who are present to other events (like this new > >>> separated contributors-oriented event, or Ops midcycle(s)). That would > >>> allow for a wider definition of "active community member" and

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On Mon, 2016-02-29 at 17:48 -0500, Anita Kuno wrote: > On 02/29/2016 05:34 PM, James Bottomley wrote: [...] > > While I accept there is potentially a gaming problem in all forms > > of Open Source (we see this in the kernel with the attempt to boost > > patch counts with trivial changes), I'd be

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On 02/29/2016 05:34 PM, James Bottomley wrote: > On Mon, 2016-02-29 at 15:57 -0500, Anita Kuno wrote: >> On 02/29/2016 03:10 PM, Eoghan Glynn wrote: >>> > Current thinking would be to give preferential rates to access > the main summit to people who are present to other events (like

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On Mon, 2016-02-29 at 15:57 -0500, Anita Kuno wrote: > On 02/29/2016 03:10 PM, Eoghan Glynn wrote: > > > > > > Current thinking would be to give preferential rates to access > > > > the main summit to people who are present to other events (like > > > > this new separated contributors-oriented

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On 02/29/2016 03:10 PM, Eoghan Glynn wrote: > >>> Current thinking would be to give preferential rates to access the main >>> summit to people who are present to other events (like this new >>> separated contributors-oriented event, or Ops midcycle(s)). That would >>> allow for a wider definition

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

> > Current thinking would be to give preferential rates to access the main > > summit to people who are present to other events (like this new > > separated contributors-oriented event, or Ops midcycle(s)). That would > > allow for a wider definition of "active community member" and reduce > >

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On 02/22/2016 10:49 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 04:14:06PM +0100, Thierry Carrez wrote: >> Hi everyone, >> >> TL;DR: Let's split the events, starting after Barcelona. > > Yes, please. Your proposal addresses the big issue I have with current > summits which is the

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On 02/29/2016 03:19 AM, Sylvain Bauza wrote: >>> 3. Losing the main summit as an excuse to fund devs travel >>> >>> Some developers are sent to the Design Summit only because the main >>> summit is happening at the same time and wouldn't get funding to attend >>> a specific event. >> >> If you

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On 02/22/2016 12:35 PM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > Clayton O'Neill wrote: >> Is the expectation that the ops mid-cycle would continue separately, >> or be held with the meeting formerly known as the Design Summit? >> >> Personally I’d prefer they be held together, but scheduled with the >> thought

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On 02/23/2016 04:26 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > Tim Bell wrote: >> On 22/02/16 17:27, "John Garbutt" wrote: >>> [...] >>> I am sure there are more questions that will pop up. Like I assume >>> this means there is no ATC free pass to the summit? And I guess a >>> small

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On 02/22/2016 06:49 PM, Matt Fischer wrote: > On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 11:51 AM, Tim Bell wrote: > >> >> >> >> >> >> On 22/02/16 17:27, "John Garbutt" wrote: >> >>> On 22 February 2016 at 15:31, Monty Taylor wrote: On 02/22/2016

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On 02/22/2016 11:06 AM, Dmitry Tantsur wrote: > I agree with Daniel + a couple more comments inline. > > On 02/22/2016 04:49 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: >> On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 04:14:06PM +0100, Thierry Carrez wrote: >>> Hi everyone, >>> >>> TL;DR: Let's split the events, starting after

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On 02/26/2016 10:13 PM, Tom Fifield wrote: > > > On 26/02/16 22:02, Thomas Goirand wrote: >> On 02/23/2016 12:33 AM, Jay Pipes wrote: >>> OpenStack Conference <-- The main event. >>> OpenStack:How <-- The developer planning event. >>> >>> :) >>> >>> -jay >> >> Probably I'm dumb, but I still

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On 29/02/16 10:32, "Thierry Carrez" wrote: >Tim Bell wrote: >> >> On 26/02/16 18:08, "Thierry Carrez" wrote: 2. Community split There is fear that the contributor-specific event will separate the community into two groups,

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 4:32 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > That was considered... and I would not necessarily be against it, but I > would like to understand what the benefit would be. Tom advocated for > keeping it as a separate event (or a set of regional separated events)

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

Tim Bell wrote: On 26/02/16 18:08, "Thierry Carrez" wrote: 2. Community split There is fear that the contributor-specific event will separate the community into two groups, with developers skipping the main event and non-developers not providing any feedback to the

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

Honestly, it took me a while before having an opinion on that subject. Le 26/02/2016 18:08, Thierry Carrez a écrit : Thierry Carrez wrote: 1. "Two trips instead of one" There is a section of attendees which benefited from a single event: in-between people who do not generally go to any

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On 2016-02-26 19:16:55 + (+), Hongbin Lu wrote: [...] > I want to point out the fact that some projects were holding > online midcycle because their developers were not able to get > approval for a pure contributor event. This may be true for some teams, but please don't assume that cost

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

-Original Message- From: James Bottomley [mailto:james.bottom...@hansenpartnership.com] Sent: February-26-16 12:38 PM To: Daniel P. Berrange Cc: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit On

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On Fri, 2016-02-26 at 17:24 +, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 08:55:52AM -0800, James Bottomley wrote: > > On Fri, 2016-02-26 at 16:03 +, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > > > On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 10:39:08AM -0500, Rich Bowen wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On 02/22/2016

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On 26/02/16 18:08, "Thierry Carrez" wrote: >> >> 2. Community split >> >> There is fear that the contributor-specific event will separate the >> community into two groups, with developers skipping the main event and >> non-developers not providing any feedback to the

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 08:55:52AM -0800, James Bottomley wrote: > On Fri, 2016-02-26 at 16:03 +, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 10:39:08AM -0500, Rich Bowen wrote: > > > > > > > > > On 02/22/2016 10:14 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > > > > Hi everyone, > > > > > > > >

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

Thierry Carrez wrote: 1. "Two trips instead of one" There is a section of attendees which benefited from a single event: in-between people who do not generally go to any midcycle events and successfully split their attention between the design summit and the main conference when they were

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 12:03 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 10:39:08AM -0500, Rich Bowen wrote: >> >> >> On 02/22/2016 10:14 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: >> > Hi everyone, >> > >> > TL;DR: Let's split the events, starting after Barcelona. >> > >> >

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On Fri, 2016-02-26 at 16:03 +, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 10:39:08AM -0500, Rich Bowen wrote: > > > > > > On 02/22/2016 10:14 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > > > Hi everyone, > > > > > > TL;DR: Let's split the events, starting after Barcelona. > > > > > > > > > >

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 10:39:08AM -0500, Rich Bowen wrote: > > > On 02/22/2016 10:14 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > > > TL;DR: Let's split the events, starting after Barcelona. > > > > > > > > Comments, thoughts ? > > Thierry (and Jay, who wrote a similar note much

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On 02/22/2016 10:14 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > Hi everyone, > > TL;DR: Let's split the events, starting after Barcelona. > > > > Comments, thoughts ? Thierry (and Jay, who wrote a similar note much earlier in February, and Lauren, who added more clarity over on the marketing list, and

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

Hi everyone, Summarizing the thread so far... The proposal was generally well-received, with negative feedback concentrated along the following themes: 1. "Two trips instead of one" There is a section of attendees which benefited from a single event: in-between people who do not generally

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On 26/02/16 22:02, Thomas Goirand wrote: On 02/23/2016 12:33 AM, Jay Pipes wrote: OpenStack Conference <-- The main event. OpenStack:How <-- The developer planning event. :) -jay Probably I'm dumb, but I still don't understand what's wrong with the name "design summit" for the developer

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On 02/23/2016 12:33 AM, Jay Pipes wrote: > OpenStack Conference <-- The main event. > OpenStack:How <-- The developer planning event. > > :) > > -jay Probably I'm dumb, but I still don't understand what's wrong with the name "design summit" for the developer planning event. Like most free

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 10:44 AM, Miguel Angel Ajo Pelayo wrote: > >> On 26 Feb 2016, at 02:38, Sean McGinnis wrote: >> >> On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 04:13:56PM +0800, Qiming Teng wrote: >>> Hi, All, >>> >>> After reading through all the +1's and -1's, we

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

> On 26 Feb 2016, at 02:38, Sean McGinnis wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 04:13:56PM +0800, Qiming Teng wrote: >> Hi, All, >> >> After reading through all the +1's and -1's, we realized how difficult >> it is to come up with a proposal that makes everyone happy. When

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 04:13:56PM +0800, Qiming Teng wrote: > Hi, All, > > After reading through all the +1's and -1's, we realized how difficult > it is to come up with a proposal that makes everyone happy. When we are > discussing this proposal with some other contributors, we came up with a >

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

Excerpts from Jan Klare's message of 2016-02-25 17:43:19 +0100: > > > On 25 Feb 2016, at 15:54, Doug Hellmann wrote: > > > > Excerpts from Jan Klare's message of 2016-02-25 15:29:08 +0100: > >> > >>> On 25 Feb 2016, at 13:39, Daniel P. Berrange

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

> On 25 Feb 2016, at 15:54, Doug Hellmann wrote: > > Excerpts from Jan Klare's message of 2016-02-25 15:29:08 +0100: >> >>> On 25 Feb 2016, at 13:39, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: >>> >>> On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 12:40:27PM +0100, Thierry Carrez wrote:

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On Thu, 2016-02-25 at 12:40 +0100, Thierry Carrez wrote: > Qiming Teng wrote: > > [...] > > Week 1: > >Wednesday-Friday: 3 days Summit. > > * Primarily an event for marketing, sales, CTOs, architects, > >operators, journalists, ... > > * Contributors can decide whether they

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

Excerpts from Jan Klare's message of 2016-02-25 15:29:08 +0100: > > > On 25 Feb 2016, at 13:39, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > > > > On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 12:40:27PM +0100, Thierry Carrez wrote: > >> Qiming Teng wrote: > >>> [...] > >>> Week 1: > >>> Wednesday-Friday: 3

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

> On 25 Feb 2016, at 13:39, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 12:40:27PM +0100, Thierry Carrez wrote: >> Qiming Teng wrote: >>> [...] >>> Week 1: >>> Wednesday-Friday: 3 days Summit. >>>* Primarily an event for marketing, sales, CTOs, architects,

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

+1 For security too, this exactly mirrors our experience. From: Duncan Thomas [mailto:duncan.tho...@gmail.com] Sent: 24 February 2016 12:55 To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit On 22

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On 02/25/2016 07:39 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 12:40:27PM +0100, Thierry Carrez wrote: >> Qiming Teng wrote: >>> [...] >>> Week 1: >>> Wednesday-Friday: 3 days Summit. >>> * Primarily an event for marketing, sales, CTOs, architects, >>> operators,

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 12:40:27PM +0100, Thierry Carrez wrote: > Qiming Teng wrote: > >[...] > >Week 1: > > Wednesday-Friday: 3 days Summit. > > * Primarily an event for marketing, sales, CTOs, architects, > > operators, journalists, ... > > * Contributors can decide whether they

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

Qiming Teng wrote: [...] Week 1: Wednesday-Friday: 3 days Summit. * Primarily an event for marketing, sales, CTOs, architects, operators, journalists, ... * Contributors can decide whether they want to attend this. Saturday-Sunday: * Social activities: contributors

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On 02/25/2016 09:13 AM, Qiming Teng wrote: > Hi, All, > > After reading through all the +1's and -1's, we realized how difficult > it is to come up with a proposal that makes everyone happy. When we are > discussing this proposal with some other contributors, we came up with a > proposal which is

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

Hi Qiming, this sounds like a much more pragmatic and practical idea to me and it think just splitting the events into two not parallel parts, but keeping them in the same “week” would also solve most of the problems mentioned in this thread, but allow people to attend both summits without

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

Hi, All, After reading through all the +1's and -1's, we realized how difficult it is to come up with a proposal that makes everyone happy. When we are discussing this proposal with some other contributors, we came up with a proposal which is a little bit different. This idea could be very

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On 02/23/2016 06:14 AM, Qiming Teng wrote: I don't think the proposal removes that opportunity. Contributors /can/ still go to OpenStack Summits. They just don't /have to/. I just don't think every contributor needs to be present at every OpenStack Summit, while I'd like to see most of them

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On 22 February 2016 at 23:11, Devananda van der Veen < devananda@gmail.com> wrote: > On 02/22/2016 09:45 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > > The split should ideally reduce the needs to organize separate in-person > mid-cycle events. If some are still needed, the main conference venue and > time

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 02/23/2016 09:50 AM, Michael Krotscheck wrote: > Also, it doesn't seem like alternative cost-savings solutions have > been considered. For example, how about we host a summit in a > Not-Top-Tier city for a change? Examples that come to mind are

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 02/23/2016 11:52 AM, Clint Byrum wrote: > I did not attend the first few summits, my first one being the > Boston event, but I did attend quite a few Ubuntu Developer > Summits, which were much more about development discussions, and > almost

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

> > > * would it better to keep the ocata cycle at a more normal length, and > >then run the "contributor events" in Mar/Sept, as opposed to Feb/Aug? > >(again to avoid the August black hole) > > > > Late March is treacherous in the US, as spring break is generally around > the last week

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

Excerpts from Eoghan Glynn's message of 2016-02-22 15:06:01 -0800: > > > Hi everyone, > > > > TL;DR: Let's split the events, starting after Barcelona. > > > > Long long version: > > > > In a global and virtual community, high-bandwidth face-to-face time is > > essential. This is why we made

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

Excerpts from Sean McGinnis's message of 2016-02-22 11:48:50 -0800: > On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 05:20:21PM +, Amrith Kumar wrote: > > Thierry and all of those who contributed to putting together this write-up, > > thank you very much. > > > > TL;DR: +0 > > > > Longer version: > > > > While I

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 10:14:11PM +0800, Qiming Teng wrote: :My take of this is that we are saving the cost by isolating developers :(contributors) from users/customers. I'm a little concerned about this as well. Though presumably at least the PTLs would still attend the User/Ops conference

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 3:40 AM Chris Dent wrote: > > However, it makes me sad to see the continued trend of limiting > in-person gatherings. They are useful as a way of keeping people > aligned with similar goals and approaches to reaching those goals. > Yes, it is

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

> >I don't think the proposal removes that opportunity. Contributors > >/can/ still go to OpenStack Summits. They just don't /have to/. I > >just don't think every contributor needs to be present at every > >OpenStack Summit, while I'd like to see most of them present at > >every separated

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 10:30:56PM -0500, michael mccune wrote: > On 02/22/2016 11:06 AM, Dmitry Tantsur wrote: > >+1 here. I got an impression that midcycles now usually happen in the > >US. Indeed, it's probably much cheaper for the majority of contributors, > >but would make things worse for

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

Thierry, Thanks for writing this up. On 02/22/2016 11:14 PM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > More importantly, it would be set to happen a couple of weeks /before/ > the previous cycle release. There is a lot of overlap between cycles. > Work on a cycle starts at the previous cycle feature freeze, while

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On Tue, 23 Feb 2016, Thierry Carrez wrote: We can't really prevent people from organizing those anyway :) I just hope social in-person team gatherings will not be needed as much with this split. What may still be needed are mid-cycle "sprints" to achieve specific objectives: those could

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

Hi ops (cc: devs), I'm writing to you to let you know why I think Thierry's proposal is a good one that probably works better for us than the current situation. The design summit for us at the moment isn't as good as it could be. You turn up, ready to contribute and help out developers with

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

Eoghan Glynn wrote: Thanks for the proposal, just a few questions: * how would we achieve a "scaled-down design summit in Barcelona"? i.e. what would be the forcing function to ensure fewer contributors attend, given that some people will already be making plans? Exactly how much

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

Henry Nash wrote: On 22 Feb 2016, at 17:45, Thierry Carrez wrote: Amrith Kumar wrote: [...] As a result of this proposal, there will still be four events each year, two "OpenStack Summit" events and two "MidCycle" events. Actually, the OpenStack summit becomes the

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

Tim Bell wrote: On 22/02/16 17:27, "John Garbutt" wrote: [...] I am sure there are more questions that will pop up. Like I assume this means there is no ATC free pass to the summit? And I guess a small nominal fee for the contributor meetup (like the recent ops meetup, to

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On 02/22/2016 11:33 AM, Jay Pipes wrote: OpenStack:How <-- The developer planning event. :) very nice ;) __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe:

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On 02/22/2016 11:06 AM, Dmitry Tantsur wrote: +1 here. I got an impression that midcycles now usually happen in the US. Indeed, it's probably much cheaper for the majority of contributors, but would make things worse for non-US folks. cost of travel has been a big reason we have never managed

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On 02/22/2016 10:14 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: Hi everyone, TL;DR: Let's split the events, starting after Barcelona. as a developer, i'm +1 for this. thanks for all the hard work putting this together Thierry. mike __

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 11:51 AM, Tim Bell wrote: > > > > > > On 22/02/16 17:27, "John Garbutt" wrote: > > >On 22 February 2016 at 15:31, Monty Taylor wrote: > >> On 02/22/2016 07:24 AM, Russell Bryant wrote: > >>> On Mon, Feb 22,

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

> Hi everyone, > > TL;DR: Let's split the events, starting after Barcelona. > > Long long version: > > In a global and virtual community, high-bandwidth face-to-face time is > essential. This is why we made the OpenStack Design Summits an integral > part of our processes from day 0. Those

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

+1 I believe that separate design summit give the chances for operators and users can focus on design sessions and gives some great feedback during design summit. We just have to think about how we attract them to there. 2016-02-23 6:07 GMT+08:00 Flavio Percoco : > > > On

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 11:31 AM, Monty Taylor wrote: > On 02/22/2016 07:24 AM, Russell Bryant wrote: > >> >> >> On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 10:14 AM, Thierry Carrez > > wrote: >> >> Hi everyone, >> >> TL;DR: Let's

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 1:52 PM, Jay Pipes wrote: > On 02/22/2016 12:45 PM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > >> I don't think the proposal removes that opportunity. Contributors /can/ >> still go to OpenStack Summits. They just don't /have to/. I just don't >> think every contributor

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 11:51 AM, Walter A. Boring IV wrote: > On 02/22/2016 09:45 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > >> Amrith Kumar wrote: >> >>> [...] >>> As a result of this proposal, there will still be four events each year, >>> two "OpenStack Summit" events and two

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 7:14 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > Hi everyone, > > TL;DR: Let's split the events, starting after Barcelona > Thank you for the excellent write-up, Thierry (and everyone else behind it)! This sounds great to me. > Long long version: > > In a global

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On 02/22/2016 09:45 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: Amrith Kumar wrote: [...] As a result of this proposal, there will still be four events each year, two "OpenStack Summit" events and two "MidCycle" events. Actually, the OpenStack summit becomes the midcycle event. The new separated

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On 02/22/2016 07:14 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: Hi everyone, TL;DR: Let's split the events, starting after Barcelona. Time is ripe for a change. After Tokyo, we at the Foundation have been considering options on how to evolve our events to solve those issues. This proposal is the result of

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 05:20:21PM +, Amrith Kumar wrote: > Thierry and all of those who contributed to putting together this write-up, > thank you very much. > > TL;DR: +0 > > Longer version: > > While I definitely believe that the new proposed timing for "OpenStack > Summit" which is

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

> On Feb 22, 2016, at 11:19 AM, Tim Bell wrote: > > >> On 22/02/16 18:35, "Thierry Carrez" wrote: >> >> Clayton O'Neill wrote: >>> Is the expectation that the ops mid-cycle would continue separately, >>> or be held with the meeting formerly known as

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On 22/02/16 18:35, "Thierry Carrez" wrote: >Clayton O'Neill wrote: >> Is the expectation that the ops mid-cycle would continue separately, >> or be held with the meeting formerly known as the Design Summit? >> >> Personally I’d prefer they be held together, but scheduled

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

> On 22 Feb 2016, at 17:45, Thierry Carrez wrote: > > Amrith Kumar wrote: >> [...] >> As a result of this proposal, there will still be four events each year, two >> "OpenStack Summit" events and two "MidCycle" events. > > Actually, the OpenStack summit becomes the

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On 22/02/16 17:27, "John Garbutt" wrote: >On 22 February 2016 at 15:31, Monty Taylor wrote: >> On 02/22/2016 07:24 AM, Russell Bryant wrote: >>> On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 10:14 AM, Thierry Carrez

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

Amrith raises an interesting point. This proposal moves from effectively 4 dev events a year to 2 dev events a year, thus *reducing* the amount of face-to-face time we have. While my first reaction to the proposed changes is positive, de facto reduction of time spent together as devs seems

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On 02/22/2016 04:49 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 04:14:06PM +0100, Thierry Carrez wrote: >> The idea would be to split the events. The first event would be for upstream >> technical contributors to OpenStack. It would be held in a simpler, >> scaled-back setting that

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On 02/22/2016 12:45 PM, Thierry Carrez wrote: I don't think the proposal removes that opportunity. Contributors /can/ still go to OpenStack Summits. They just don't /have to/. I just don't think every contributor needs to be present at every OpenStack Summit, while I'd like to see most of them

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

Amrith Kumar wrote: [...] As a result of this proposal, there will still be four events each year, two "OpenStack Summit" events and two "MidCycle" events. Actually, the OpenStack summit becomes the midcycle event. The new separated contributors-oriented event[tm] happens at the beginning of

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

Clayton O'Neill wrote: Is the expectation that the ops mid-cycle would continue separately, or be held with the meeting formerly known as the Design Summit? Personally I’d prefer they be held together, but scheduled with the thought that operators aren’t likely to be interested in work

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

+1 2016-02-22 18:27 GMT+01:00 Clayton O'Neill : > Is the expectation that the ops mid-cycle would continue separately, > or be held with the meeting formerly known as the Design Summit? > > Personally I’d prefer they be held together, but scheduled with the > thought that

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

Is the expectation that the ops mid-cycle would continue separately, or be held with the meeting formerly known as the Design Summit? Personally I’d prefer they be held together, but scheduled with the thought that operators aren’t likely to be interested in work sessions, but that a good number

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

> On Feb 22, 2016, at 8:52 AM, Clayton O'Neill wrote: > > I think this is a great proposal, but like Matt I’m curious how it > might impact the operator sessions that have been part of the Design > Summit and the Operators Mid-Cycle. > > As an operator I got a lot out of

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 02/22/2016 10:45 AM, Jay Pipes wrote: >> If you now have a separate summit/meeting for the developers away >> from the big splashy business event, I'm wondering if we might >> make it harder for many developers to get funded for this >> travel.

  1   2   >