Re: [openstack-dev] Summit Core Party after Austin

On 4/22/2016 4:58 PM, Tom Fifield wrote: Hi all, On 22/04/16 16:40, Clint Byrum wrote: But in the mean time, maybe we can just send this message to party planners: Provide us with interesting spaces to converse and bond in, and we will be happier. Spoke with the party planners and got the

Re: [openstack-dev] Summit Core Party after Austin

Amrith Kumar wrote: To all who have said the Core Party was a bad thing, let me echo Sean's feelings, and add that I actually liked the core parties more than any of the others, and actually found them to be a very good thing. I too got to meet people who I would normally not have had a

Re: [openstack-dev] Summit Core Party after Austin

Many thanks Tom! > -Original Message- > From: Tom Fifield [mailto:t...@openstack.org] > Sent: Friday, April 22, 2016 5:59 PM > To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] Summit Core Party after Austin > > Hi all, > > On 22/04/

Re: [openstack-dev] Summit Core Party after Austin

On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 2:58 PM, Tom Fifield wrote: > Hi all, > > On 22/04/16 16:40, Clint Byrum wrote: > >> But in the mean time, maybe we can just send this message >> to party planners: Provide us with interesting spaces to converse and >> bond in, and we will be happier.

Re: [openstack-dev] Summit Core Party after Austin

Hi all, On 22/04/16 16:40, Clint Byrum wrote: But in the mean time, maybe we can just send this message to party planners: Provide us with interesting spaces to converse and bond in, and we will be happier. Spoke with the party planners and got the inside gossip :) The good news: for the

Re: [openstack-dev] Summit Core Party after Austin

Excerpts from Chivers, Doug's message of 2016-04-22 10:17:45 -0700: > The Vancouver core party was a fantastic opportunity to meet some very smart > people and learn a lot about the projects they worked on. It was probably one > of the most useful parts of the summit, certainly more so than the

Re: [openstack-dev] Summit Core Party after Austin

The Vancouver core party was a fantastic opportunity to meet some very smart people and learn a lot about the projects they worked on. It was probably one of the most useful parts of the summit, certainly more so than the greasy marketing party, and arguably a much better use of developer time.

Re: [openstack-dev] Summit Core Party after Austin

Excerpts from Thierry Carrez's message of 2016-04-21 09:22:53 -0700: > Michael Krotscheck wrote: > > So, HPE is seeking sponsors to continue the core party. The reasons are > > varied - internal sponsors have moved to other projects, the Big Tent > > has drastically increased the # of cores, and

Re: [openstack-dev] Summit Core Party after Austin

On 18:57 Apr 21, Thierry Carrez wrote: > Thierry Carrez wrote: > >[...] > >I think it's inappropriate because it gives a wrong incentive to become > >a core reviewer. Core reviewing should just be a duty you sign up to, > >not necessarily a way to get into a cool party. It was also a bit >

Re: [openstack-dev] Summit Core Party after Austin

age- > From: Sean Dague [mailto:s...@dague.net] > Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2016 4:12 PM > To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] Summit Core Party after Austin > > On 04/21/2016 04:04 PM, Monty Taylor wrote: > > On 04/21/2016 02:08 PM, D

Re: [openstack-dev] Summit Core Party after Austin

On 21/04/16 13:40 -0400, Doug Hellmann wrote: Excerpts from Thierry Carrez's message of 2016-04-21 18:22:53 +0200: Michael Krotscheck wrote: > So, HPE is seeking sponsors to continue the core party. The reasons are > varied - internal sponsors have moved to other projects, the Big Tent > has

Re: [openstack-dev] Summit Core Party after Austin

On 04/21/2016 04:04 PM, Monty Taylor wrote: > On 04/21/2016 02:08 PM, Devananda van der Veen wrote: >> The first cross-project design summit tracks were held at the following >> summit, in Atlanta, though I recall it lacking the necessary >> participation to be successful. Today, we have many more

Re: [openstack-dev] Summit Core Party after Austin

On 04/21/2016 02:08 PM, Devananda van der Veen wrote: On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 9:07 AM, Michael Krotscheck > wrote: Hey everyone- So, HPE is seeking sponsors to continue the core party. The reasons are varied - internal sponsors

Re: [openstack-dev] Summit Core Party after Austin

On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 9:07 AM, Michael Krotscheck wrote: > Hey everyone- > > So, HPE is seeking sponsors to continue the core party. The reasons are > varied - internal sponsors have moved to other projects, the Big Tent has > drastically increased the # of cores, and the

Re: [openstack-dev] Summit Core Party after Austin

On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 2:43 PM, Tim Bell wrote: > > On 21/04/16 19:40, "Doug Hellmann" wrote: > > >Excerpts from Thierry Carrez's message of 2016-04-21 18:22:53 +0200: > >> Michael Krotscheck wrote: > >> > >> > >> So.. while I understand the need for

Re: [openstack-dev] Summit Core Party after Austin

On 21/04/16 19:40, "Doug Hellmann" wrote: >Excerpts from Thierry Carrez's message of 2016-04-21 18:22:53 +0200: >> Michael Krotscheck wrote: >> >> >> So.. while I understand the need for calmer parties during the week, I >> think the general trends is to have less

Re: [openstack-dev] Summit Core Party after Austin

Excerpts from Jeremy Stanley's message of 2016-04-21 17:54:37 +: > On 2016-04-21 13:40:15 -0400 (-0400), Doug Hellmann wrote: > [...] > > I didn't realize the tag was being used that way. I agree it's > > completely inappropriate, and I wish someone had asked. > [...] > > It's likely seen by

Re: [openstack-dev] Summit Core Party after Austin

On 2016-04-21 13:40:15 -0400 (-0400), Doug Hellmann wrote: [...] > I didn't realize the tag was being used that way. I agree it's > completely inappropriate, and I wish someone had asked. [...] It's likely seen by some as a big-tent proxy for the old integrated vs. incubated distinction. --

Re: [openstack-dev] Summit Core Party after Austin

Excerpts from Thierry Carrez's message of 2016-04-21 18:22:53 +0200: > Michael Krotscheck wrote: > > So, HPE is seeking sponsors to continue the core party. The reasons are > > varied - internal sponsors have moved to other projects, the Big Tent > > has drastically increased the # of cores, and

Re: [openstack-dev] Summit Core Party after Austin

Thierry Carrez wrote: [...] I think it's inappropriate because it gives a wrong incentive to become a core reviewer. Core reviewing should just be a duty you sign up to, not necessarily a way to get into a cool party. It was also a bit exclusive of other types of contributions. Apparently in

Re: [openstack-dev] Summit Core Party after Austin

Michael Krotscheck wrote: So, HPE is seeking sponsors to continue the core party. The reasons are varied - internal sponsors have moved to other projects, the Big Tent has drastically increased the # of cores, and the upcoming summit format change creates quite a bit of uncertainty on everything

Re: [openstack-dev] Summit Core Party after Austin

On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 9:07 AM, Michael Krotscheck wrote: > Hey everyone- > > So, HPE is seeking sponsors to continue the core party. The reasons are > varied - internal sponsors have moved to other projects, the Big Tent has > drastically increased the # of cores, and the

[openstack-dev] Summit Core Party after Austin

Hey everyone- So, HPE is seeking sponsors to continue the core party. The reasons are varied - internal sponsors have moved to other projects, the Big Tent has drastically increased the # of cores, and the upcoming summit format change creates quite a bit of uncertainty on everything surrounding