Re: [openstack-dev] [All] Finalizing cross-project design summit track
Russell Bryant wrote: On 10/30/2014 12:12 PM, Monty Taylor wrote: On 10/30/2014 04:53 PM, Joe Gordon wrote: On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 4:01 AM, Thierry Carrez thie...@openstack.org wrote: Jay Pipes wrote: On 10/29/2014 09:07 PM, Russell Bryant wrote: On 10/29/2014 06:46 PM, Rochelle Grober wrote: Any chance we could use the opening to move either the Refstack session or the logging session from their current joint (and conflicting) time (15:40)? QA really would be appreciated at both. And I'd really like to be at both. I'd say the Refstack one would go better in the debug slot, as the API stuff is sort of related to the logging. Switching with one of the 14:50 sessions might also work. Just hoping. I really want great participation at all of these sessions. The gate debugging session is most likely going to be dropped at this point. I don't see a big problem with moving the refstack one to that slot (the first time). Anyone else have a strong opinion on this? Sounds good to me. Sounds good. With the gate debugging session being dropped due to being the wrong format to be productive, we now need a new session. After looking over the etherpad of proposed cross project sessions I think there is one glaring omission: the SDK. In the Kilo Cycle Goals Exercise thread [0] having a real SDK was one of the top answers. Many folks had great responses that clearly explained the issues end users are having [1]. As for who could lead a session like this I have two ideas: Monty Taylor, who had one of the most colorful explanations to why this is so critical, or Dean Troyer, one of the few people actually working on this right now. I think it would be embarrassing if we had no cross project session on SDKs, since there appears to be a consensus that the making life easier for the end user is a high priority. The current catch is, the free slot is now at 15:40, so it would compete with 'How to Tackle Technical Debt in Kilo,' a session which I expect to be very popular with the same people who would be interested in attending a SDK session. I'm happy to lead this, to co-lead with Dean or to just watch Dean lead it - although I can promise in any format to start off the time period with some very colorful ranting. I think I'm less necessary in the tech debt session, as other than yes, please get rid of it I probably don't have too much more input that will be helpful. OK, awesome! I'll put you down for now. I could use a proposed session description to put on sched.org. Otherwise, I'll just make something up. +1 on the topic. Thanks Joe for completing the circle we started with the TC candidates priorities ! I'd make it about the End user experience in general. -- Thierry Carrez (ttx) ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [All] Finalizing cross-project design summit track
Jay Pipes wrote: On 10/29/2014 09:07 PM, Russell Bryant wrote: On 10/29/2014 06:46 PM, Rochelle Grober wrote: Any chance we could use the opening to move either the Refstack session or the logging session from their current joint (and conflicting) time (15:40)? QA really would be appreciated at both. And I'd really like to be at both. I'd say the Refstack one would go better in the debug slot, as the API stuff is sort of related to the logging. Switching with one of the 14:50 sessions might also work. Just hoping. I really want great participation at all of these sessions. The gate debugging session is most likely going to be dropped at this point. I don't see a big problem with moving the refstack one to that slot (the first time). Anyone else have a strong opinion on this? Sounds good to me. Sounds good. -- Thierry Carrez (ttx) ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [All] Finalizing cross-project design summit track
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 4:01 AM, Thierry Carrez thie...@openstack.org wrote: Jay Pipes wrote: On 10/29/2014 09:07 PM, Russell Bryant wrote: On 10/29/2014 06:46 PM, Rochelle Grober wrote: Any chance we could use the opening to move either the Refstack session or the logging session from their current joint (and conflicting) time (15:40)? QA really would be appreciated at both. And I'd really like to be at both. I'd say the Refstack one would go better in the debug slot, as the API stuff is sort of related to the logging. Switching with one of the 14:50 sessions might also work. Just hoping. I really want great participation at all of these sessions. The gate debugging session is most likely going to be dropped at this point. I don't see a big problem with moving the refstack one to that slot (the first time). Anyone else have a strong opinion on this? Sounds good to me. Sounds good. With the gate debugging session being dropped due to being the wrong format to be productive, we now need a new session. After looking over the etherpad of proposed cross project sessions I think there is one glaring omission: the SDK. In the Kilo Cycle Goals Exercise thread [0] having a real SDK was one of the top answers. Many folks had great responses that clearly explained the issues end users are having [1]. As for who could lead a session like this I have two ideas: Monty Taylor, who had one of the most colorful explanations to why this is so critical, or Dean Troyer, one of the few people actually working on this right now. I think it would be embarrassing if we had no cross project session on SDKs, since there appears to be a consensus that the making life easier for the end user is a high priority. The current catch is, the free slot is now at 15:40, so it would compete with 'How to Tackle Technical Debt in Kilo,' a session which I expect to be very popular with the same people who would be interested in attending a SDK session. [0] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2014-September/044766.html [1] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/6cWQG9oNsr -- Thierry Carrez (ttx) ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [All] Finalizing cross-project design summit track
On 10/30/2014 04:53 PM, Joe Gordon wrote: On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 4:01 AM, Thierry Carrez thie...@openstack.org wrote: Jay Pipes wrote: On 10/29/2014 09:07 PM, Russell Bryant wrote: On 10/29/2014 06:46 PM, Rochelle Grober wrote: Any chance we could use the opening to move either the Refstack session or the logging session from their current joint (and conflicting) time (15:40)? QA really would be appreciated at both. And I'd really like to be at both. I'd say the Refstack one would go better in the debug slot, as the API stuff is sort of related to the logging. Switching with one of the 14:50 sessions might also work. Just hoping. I really want great participation at all of these sessions. The gate debugging session is most likely going to be dropped at this point. I don't see a big problem with moving the refstack one to that slot (the first time). Anyone else have a strong opinion on this? Sounds good to me. Sounds good. With the gate debugging session being dropped due to being the wrong format to be productive, we now need a new session. After looking over the etherpad of proposed cross project sessions I think there is one glaring omission: the SDK. In the Kilo Cycle Goals Exercise thread [0] having a real SDK was one of the top answers. Many folks had great responses that clearly explained the issues end users are having [1]. As for who could lead a session like this I have two ideas: Monty Taylor, who had one of the most colorful explanations to why this is so critical, or Dean Troyer, one of the few people actually working on this right now. I think it would be embarrassing if we had no cross project session on SDKs, since there appears to be a consensus that the making life easier for the end user is a high priority. The current catch is, the free slot is now at 15:40, so it would compete with 'How to Tackle Technical Debt in Kilo,' a session which I expect to be very popular with the same people who would be interested in attending a SDK session. I'm happy to lead this, to co-lead with Dean or to just watch Dean lead it - although I can promise in any format to start off the time period with some very colorful ranting. I think I'm less necessary in the tech debt session, as other than yes, please get rid of it I probably don't have too much more input that will be helpful. ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [All] Finalizing cross-project design summit track
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 10:53 AM, Joe Gordon joe.gord...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 4:01 AM, Thierry Carrez thie...@openstack.org wrote: Jay Pipes wrote: On 10/29/2014 09:07 PM, Russell Bryant wrote: On 10/29/2014 06:46 PM, Rochelle Grober wrote: Any chance we could use the opening to move either the Refstack session or the logging session from their current joint (and conflicting) time (15:40)? QA really would be appreciated at both. And I'd really like to be at both. I'd say the Refstack one would go better in the debug slot, as the API stuff is sort of related to the logging. Switching with one of the 14:50 sessions might also work. Just hoping. I really want great participation at all of these sessions. The gate debugging session is most likely going to be dropped at this point. I don't see a big problem with moving the refstack one to that slot (the first time). Anyone else have a strong opinion on this? Sounds good to me. Sounds good. With the gate debugging session being dropped due to being the wrong format to be productive, we now need a new session. After looking over the etherpad of proposed cross project sessions I think there is one glaring omission: the SDK. In the Kilo Cycle Goals Exercise thread [0] having a real SDK was one of the top answers. Many folks had great responses that clearly explained the issues end users are having [1]. As for who could lead a session like this I have two ideas: Monty Taylor, who had one of the most colorful explanations to why this is so critical, or Dean Troyer, one of the few people actually working on this right now. I think it would be embarrassing if we had no cross project session on SDKs, since there appears to be a consensus that the making life easier for the end user is a high priority. There are many discussion sessions related to SDKs, they just aren't all in the cross-project slots. Plus these don't require an ATC badge (something users may not have). Application Ecosystem Working Group https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Application_Ecosystem_Working_Group Monday 2:30 (Degas) Thursday 1:40 (Hyatt) I think we can talk about the real SDK at one of these. There's also: Getting Started with the OpenStack Python SDK Monday 4:20 (Room 242AB) Anne The current catch is, the free slot is now at 15:40, so it would compete with 'How to Tackle Technical Debt in Kilo,' a session which I expect to be very popular with the same people who would be interested in attending a SDK session. [0] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2014-September/044766.html [1] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/6cWQG9oNsr -- Thierry Carrez (ttx) ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [All] Finalizing cross-project design summit track
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 9:20 AM, Anne Gentle a...@openstack.org wrote: On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 10:53 AM, Joe Gordon joe.gord...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 4:01 AM, Thierry Carrez thie...@openstack.org wrote: Jay Pipes wrote: On 10/29/2014 09:07 PM, Russell Bryant wrote: On 10/29/2014 06:46 PM, Rochelle Grober wrote: Any chance we could use the opening to move either the Refstack session or the logging session from their current joint (and conflicting) time (15:40)? QA really would be appreciated at both. And I'd really like to be at both. I'd say the Refstack one would go better in the debug slot, as the API stuff is sort of related to the logging. Switching with one of the 14:50 sessions might also work. Just hoping. I really want great participation at all of these sessions. The gate debugging session is most likely going to be dropped at this point. I don't see a big problem with moving the refstack one to that slot (the first time). Anyone else have a strong opinion on this? Sounds good to me. Sounds good. With the gate debugging session being dropped due to being the wrong format to be productive, we now need a new session. After looking over the etherpad of proposed cross project sessions I think there is one glaring omission: the SDK. In the Kilo Cycle Goals Exercise thread [0] having a real SDK was one of the top answers. Many folks had great responses that clearly explained the issues end users are having [1]. As for who could lead a session like this I have two ideas: Monty Taylor, who had one of the most colorful explanations to why this is so critical, or Dean Troyer, one of the few people actually working on this right now. I think it would be embarrassing if we had no cross project session on SDKs, since there appears to be a consensus that the making life easier for the end user is a high priority. There are many discussion sessions related to SDKs, they just aren't all in the cross-project slots. Plus these don't require an ATC badge (something users may not have). If we want to make sure the end user has a more uniform experience, having the individual python-*client discussions isn't sufficient. Also, the issue is not lack of user feedback, the issue here is more of a lack of people implementing the feedback. Application Ecosystem Working Group https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Application_Ecosystem_Working_Group Monday 2:30 (Degas) Thursday 1:40 (Hyatt) These sessions have pretty broad scopes, and I don't think a discussion on SDKs here is enough, since the issue isn't a lack of feedback. I think we can talk about the real SDK at one of these. There's also: Getting Started with the OpenStack Python SDK Monday 4:20 (Room 242AB) This isn't a a design summit session, so it doesn't really make sense to do future design work here. Anne The current catch is, the free slot is now at 15:40, so it would compete with 'How to Tackle Technical Debt in Kilo,' a session which I expect to be very popular with the same people who would be interested in attending a SDK session. [0] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2014-September/044766.html [1] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/6cWQG9oNsr -- Thierry Carrez (ttx) ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [All] Finalizing cross-project design summit track
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 11:48 AM, Joe Gordon joe.gord...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 9:20 AM, Anne Gentle a...@openstack.org wrote: On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 10:53 AM, Joe Gordon joe.gord...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 4:01 AM, Thierry Carrez thie...@openstack.org wrote: Jay Pipes wrote: On 10/29/2014 09:07 PM, Russell Bryant wrote: On 10/29/2014 06:46 PM, Rochelle Grober wrote: Any chance we could use the opening to move either the Refstack session or the logging session from their current joint (and conflicting) time (15:40)? QA really would be appreciated at both. And I'd really like to be at both. I'd say the Refstack one would go better in the debug slot, as the API stuff is sort of related to the logging. Switching with one of the 14:50 sessions might also work. Just hoping. I really want great participation at all of these sessions. The gate debugging session is most likely going to be dropped at this point. I don't see a big problem with moving the refstack one to that slot (the first time). Anyone else have a strong opinion on this? Sounds good to me. Sounds good. With the gate debugging session being dropped due to being the wrong format to be productive, we now need a new session. After looking over the etherpad of proposed cross project sessions I think there is one glaring omission: the SDK. In the Kilo Cycle Goals Exercise thread [0] having a real SDK was one of the top answers. Many folks had great responses that clearly explained the issues end users are having [1]. As for who could lead a session like this I have two ideas: Monty Taylor, who had one of the most colorful explanations to why this is so critical, or Dean Troyer, one of the few people actually working on this right now. I think it would be embarrassing if we had no cross project session on SDKs, since there appears to be a consensus that the making life easier for the end user is a high priority. There are many discussion sessions related to SDKs, they just aren't all in the cross-project slots. Plus these don't require an ATC badge (something users may not have). If we want to make sure the end user has a more uniform experience, having the individual python-*client discussions isn't sufficient. Also, the issue is not lack of user feedback, the issue here is more of a lack of people implementing the feedback. Agreed, so a cross-project session may help with that. Still, non-ATCs may want to pick up this work and just don't know how. I'd like to see ATC at the Ecosystem sessions to help with that direction of contribution. I know we need this session, just trying to find a place. Application Ecosystem Working Group https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Application_Ecosystem_Working_Group Monday 2:30 (Degas) Thursday 1:40 (Hyatt) These sessions have pretty broad scopes, and I don't think a discussion on SDKs here is enough, since the issue isn't a lack of feedback. Okay, fair enough. I think we can talk about the real SDK at one of these. There's also: Getting Started with the OpenStack Python SDK Monday 4:20 (Room 242AB) This isn't a a design summit session, so it doesn't really make sense to do future design work here. Agreed, was just making sure people on this list are aware. Anne Anne The current catch is, the free slot is now at 15:40, so it would compete with 'How to Tackle Technical Debt in Kilo,' a session which I expect to be very popular with the same people who would be interested in attending a SDK session. [0] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2014-September/044766.html [1] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/6cWQG9oNsr -- Thierry Carrez (ttx) ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [All] Finalizing cross-project design summit track
Hi all, I've add a new item (No. 34 in the bottom) for Disaster Reover topics On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 5:48 PM, Joe Gordon joe.gord...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 9:20 AM, Anne Gentle a...@openstack.org wrote: On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 10:53 AM, Joe Gordon joe.gord...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 4:01 AM, Thierry Carrez thie...@openstack.org wrote: Jay Pipes wrote: On 10/29/2014 09:07 PM, Russell Bryant wrote: On 10/29/2014 06:46 PM, Rochelle Grober wrote: Any chance we could use the opening to move either the Refstack session or the logging session from their current joint (and conflicting) time (15:40)? QA really would be appreciated at both. And I'd really like to be at both. I'd say the Refstack one would go better in the debug slot, as the API stuff is sort of related to the logging. Switching with one of the 14:50 sessions might also work. Just hoping. I really want great participation at all of these sessions. The gate debugging session is most likely going to be dropped at this point. I don't see a big problem with moving the refstack one to that slot (the first time). Anyone else have a strong opinion on this? Sounds good to me. Sounds good. With the gate debugging session being dropped due to being the wrong format to be productive, we now need a new session. After looking over the etherpad of proposed cross project sessions I think there is one glaring omission: the SDK. In the Kilo Cycle Goals Exercise thread [0] having a real SDK was one of the top answers. Many folks had great responses that clearly explained the issues end users are having [1]. As for who could lead a session like this I have two ideas: Monty Taylor, who had one of the most colorful explanations to why this is so critical, or Dean Troyer, one of the few people actually working on this right now. I think it would be embarrassing if we had no cross project session on SDKs, since there appears to be a consensus that the making life easier for the end user is a high priority. There are many discussion sessions related to SDKs, they just aren't all in the cross-project slots. Plus these don't require an ATC badge (something users may not have). If we want to make sure the end user has a more uniform experience, having the individual python-*client discussions isn't sufficient. Also, the issue is not lack of user feedback, the issue here is more of a lack of people implementing the feedback. Application Ecosystem Working Group https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Application_Ecosystem_Working_Group Monday 2:30 (Degas) Thursday 1:40 (Hyatt) These sessions have pretty broad scopes, and I don't think a discussion on SDKs here is enough, since the issue isn't a lack of feedback. I think we can talk about the real SDK at one of these. There's also: Getting Started with the OpenStack Python SDK Monday 4:20 (Room 242AB) This isn't a a design summit session, so it doesn't really make sense to do future design work here. Anne The current catch is, the free slot is now at 15:40, so it would compete with 'How to Tackle Technical Debt in Kilo,' a session which I expect to be very popular with the same people who would be interested in attending a SDK session. [0] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2014-September/044766.html [1] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/6cWQG9oNsr -- Thierry Carrez (ttx) ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev -- Zhipeng Huang Research Assistant Mobile Ad-Hoc Network Lab, Calit2 University of California, Irvine Email: zhipe...@uci.edu Office: Calit2 Building Room 2402 OpenStack, OpenDaylight, OpenCompute affcienado ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [All] Finalizing cross-project design summit track
On 10/30/2014 12:12 PM, Monty Taylor wrote: On 10/30/2014 04:53 PM, Joe Gordon wrote: On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 4:01 AM, Thierry Carrez thie...@openstack.org wrote: Jay Pipes wrote: On 10/29/2014 09:07 PM, Russell Bryant wrote: On 10/29/2014 06:46 PM, Rochelle Grober wrote: Any chance we could use the opening to move either the Refstack session or the logging session from their current joint (and conflicting) time (15:40)? QA really would be appreciated at both. And I'd really like to be at both. I'd say the Refstack one would go better in the debug slot, as the API stuff is sort of related to the logging. Switching with one of the 14:50 sessions might also work. Just hoping. I really want great participation at all of these sessions. The gate debugging session is most likely going to be dropped at this point. I don't see a big problem with moving the refstack one to that slot (the first time). Anyone else have a strong opinion on this? Sounds good to me. Sounds good. With the gate debugging session being dropped due to being the wrong format to be productive, we now need a new session. After looking over the etherpad of proposed cross project sessions I think there is one glaring omission: the SDK. In the Kilo Cycle Goals Exercise thread [0] having a real SDK was one of the top answers. Many folks had great responses that clearly explained the issues end users are having [1]. As for who could lead a session like this I have two ideas: Monty Taylor, who had one of the most colorful explanations to why this is so critical, or Dean Troyer, one of the few people actually working on this right now. I think it would be embarrassing if we had no cross project session on SDKs, since there appears to be a consensus that the making life easier for the end user is a high priority. The current catch is, the free slot is now at 15:40, so it would compete with 'How to Tackle Technical Debt in Kilo,' a session which I expect to be very popular with the same people who would be interested in attending a SDK session. I'm happy to lead this, to co-lead with Dean or to just watch Dean lead it - although I can promise in any format to start off the time period with some very colorful ranting. I think I'm less necessary in the tech debt session, as other than yes, please get rid of it I probably don't have too much more input that will be helpful. OK, awesome! I'll put you down for now. I could use a proposed session description to put on sched.org. Otherwise, I'll just make something up. -- Russell Bryant ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [All] Finalizing cross-project design summit track
joehuang wrote: Is the cascading included in the session Approaches for scaling out [1] ? Yes it is. The goal of the session is to get the proponents of the various scaling out approaches in the same room so that they compare notes and potentially converge. -- Thierry Carrez (ttx) ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [All] Finalizing cross-project design summit track
On 10/28/2014 05:22 PM, Russell Bryant wrote: A draft schedule has been posted for the cross-project design summit track: http://kilodesignsummit.sched.org/overview/type/cross-project+workshops#.VFAFFXVGjUa If you have any schedule changes to propose for really bad conflicts, please let me know. We really tried to minimize conflicts, but it's impossible to resolve them all. The next steps are to identify session leads and get the leads to write session descriptions to put on the schedule. We're collecting both at the top of the proposals etherpad: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/kilo-crossproject-summit-topics If you were the proposer of one of these sessions and are not already listed as the session lead, please add yourself. If you'd like to volunteer to lead a session that doesn't have a lead, please speak up. For the sessions you are leading, please draft a description on the etherpad that can be used for the session on sched.org. Thank you! I was trying to track down the origin of the Debugging Gate Failures submission - http://kilodesignsummit.sched.org/event/5cfc92906adc5830355ddcedbb95d977 (through matching hex author colors in etherpad... fun!) It looks like John G copied it over because someone (lost to the mists of time) put it in the Nova ideas etherpad. I'd actually argue that a 40 minute interactive session without much prep isn't going to be all that useful (and honestly probably a terrible experience for all parties involved). This is a topic that Jay, Dan, and I have discussed for doing an upcoming bootstrapping hour on (which also means it would have a long term archived version), and I think that's probably a better way to do a thing like this. As there is no owner for this, there is no one to pull it out of the agenda. But I think it's something that should be considered. -Sean -- Sean Dague http://dague.net ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [All] Finalizing cross-project design summit track
On 10/29/2014 07:22 AM, Sean Dague wrote: On 10/28/2014 05:22 PM, Russell Bryant wrote: A draft schedule has been posted for the cross-project design summit track: http://kilodesignsummit.sched.org/overview/type/cross-project+workshops#.VFAFFXVGjUa If you have any schedule changes to propose for really bad conflicts, please let me know. We really tried to minimize conflicts, but it's impossible to resolve them all. The next steps are to identify session leads and get the leads to write session descriptions to put on the schedule. We're collecting both at the top of the proposals etherpad: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/kilo-crossproject-summit-topics If you were the proposer of one of these sessions and are not already listed as the session lead, please add yourself. If you'd like to volunteer to lead a session that doesn't have a lead, please speak up. For the sessions you are leading, please draft a description on the etherpad that can be used for the session on sched.org. Thank you! I was trying to track down the origin of the Debugging Gate Failures submission - http://kilodesignsummit.sched.org/event/5cfc92906adc5830355ddcedbb95d977 (through matching hex author colors in etherpad... fun!) It looks like John G copied it over because someone (lost to the mists of time) put it in the Nova ideas etherpad. I'd actually argue that a 40 minute interactive session without much prep isn't going to be all that useful (and honestly probably a terrible experience for all parties involved). This is a topic that Jay, Dan, and I have discussed for doing an upcoming bootstrapping hour on (which also means it would have a long term archived version), and I think that's probably a better way to do a thing like this. As there is no owner for this, there is no one to pull it out of the agenda. But I think it's something that should be considered. I'm fine with pulling it. If so, we can give something else 2 timeslots, or pull another topic back in. Any suggestions for one that could use 2 slots? On a related note, next time around, if we use etherpads for proposals again, we should really use some common formatting for proposals, and require a session lead listed. -- Russell Bryant ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [All] Finalizing cross-project design summit track
On 10/29/2014 08:20 AM, Russell Bryant wrote: On 10/29/2014 07:22 AM, Sean Dague wrote: On 10/28/2014 05:22 PM, Russell Bryant wrote: A draft schedule has been posted for the cross-project design summit track: http://kilodesignsummit.sched.org/overview/type/cross-project+workshops#.VFAFFXVGjUa If you have any schedule changes to propose for really bad conflicts, please let me know. We really tried to minimize conflicts, but it's impossible to resolve them all. The next steps are to identify session leads and get the leads to write session descriptions to put on the schedule. We're collecting both at the top of the proposals etherpad: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/kilo-crossproject-summit-topics If you were the proposer of one of these sessions and are not already listed as the session lead, please add yourself. If you'd like to volunteer to lead a session that doesn't have a lead, please speak up. For the sessions you are leading, please draft a description on the etherpad that can be used for the session on sched.org. Thank you! I was trying to track down the origin of the Debugging Gate Failures submission - http://kilodesignsummit.sched.org/event/5cfc92906adc5830355ddcedbb95d977 (through matching hex author colors in etherpad... fun!) It looks like John G copied it over because someone (lost to the mists of time) put it in the Nova ideas etherpad. I'd actually argue that a 40 minute interactive session without much prep isn't going to be all that useful (and honestly probably a terrible experience for all parties involved). This is a topic that Jay, Dan, and I have discussed for doing an upcoming bootstrapping hour on (which also means it would have a long term archived version), and I think that's probably a better way to do a thing like this. As there is no owner for this, there is no one to pull it out of the agenda. But I think it's something that should be considered. I'm fine with pulling it. If so, we can give something else 2 timeslots, or pull another topic back in. Any suggestions for one that could use 2 slots? On a related note, next time around, if we use etherpads for proposals again, we should really use some common formatting for proposals, and require a session lead listed. Agreed. I think proposals without a session lead specified should be nixed. Otherwise we play this giant game of telephone tag. :) -- Sean Dague http://dague.net ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [All] Finalizing cross-project design summit track
On 10/29/2014 07:22 AM, Sean Dague wrote: On 10/28/2014 05:22 PM, Russell Bryant wrote: A draft schedule has been posted for the cross-project design summit track: http://kilodesignsummit.sched.org/overview/type/cross-project+workshops#.VFAFFXVGjUa If you have any schedule changes to propose for really bad conflicts, please let me know. We really tried to minimize conflicts, but it's impossible to resolve them all. The next steps are to identify session leads and get the leads to write session descriptions to put on the schedule. We're collecting both at the top of the proposals etherpad: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/kilo-crossproject-summit-topics If you were the proposer of one of these sessions and are not already listed as the session lead, please add yourself. If you'd like to volunteer to lead a session that doesn't have a lead, please speak up. For the sessions you are leading, please draft a description on the etherpad that can be used for the session on sched.org. Thank you! I was trying to track down the origin of the Debugging Gate Failures submission - http://kilodesignsummit.sched.org/event/5cfc92906adc5830355ddcedbb95d977 (through matching hex author colors in etherpad... fun!) It looks like John G copied it over because someone (lost to the mists of time) put it in the Nova ideas etherpad. I'd actually argue that a 40 minute interactive session without much prep isn't going to be all that useful (and honestly probably a terrible experience for all parties involved). This is a topic that Jay, Dan, and I have discussed for doing an upcoming bootstrapping hour on (which also means it would have a long term archived version), and I think that's probably a better way to do a thing like this. As there is no owner for this, there is no one to pull it out of the agenda. But I think it's something that should be considered. Actually, it was me who added that to the cross-project session proposal etherpad :) But, that said, I agree with you that the format of the cross-project sessions are not ideal for this topic and it would be better as an archived OBH session. Best, -jay ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [All] Finalizing cross-project design summit track
Any chance we could use the opening to move either the Refstack session or the logging session from their current joint (and conflicting) time (15:40)? QA really would be appreciated at both. And I'd really like to be at both. I'd say the Refstack one would go better in the debug slot, as the API stuff is sort of related to the logging. Switching with one of the 14:50 sessions might also work. Just hoping. I really want great participation at all of these sessions. --rocky -Original Message- From: Jay Pipes [mailto:jaypi...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2014 6:35 AM To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [All] Finalizing cross-project design summit track On 10/29/2014 07:22 AM, Sean Dague wrote: On 10/28/2014 05:22 PM, Russell Bryant wrote: A draft schedule has been posted for the cross-project design summit track: http://kilodesignsummit.sched.org/overview/type/cross-project+workshops#.VFAFFXVGjUa If you have any schedule changes to propose for really bad conflicts, please let me know. We really tried to minimize conflicts, but it's impossible to resolve them all. The next steps are to identify session leads and get the leads to write session descriptions to put on the schedule. We're collecting both at the top of the proposals etherpad: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/kilo-crossproject-summit-topics If you were the proposer of one of these sessions and are not already listed as the session lead, please add yourself. If you'd like to volunteer to lead a session that doesn't have a lead, please speak up. For the sessions you are leading, please draft a description on the etherpad that can be used for the session on sched.org. Thank you! I was trying to track down the origin of the Debugging Gate Failures submission - http://kilodesignsummit.sched.org/event/5cfc92906adc5830355ddcedbb95d977 (through matching hex author colors in etherpad... fun!) It looks like John G copied it over because someone (lost to the mists of time) put it in the Nova ideas etherpad. I'd actually argue that a 40 minute interactive session without much prep isn't going to be all that useful (and honestly probably a terrible experience for all parties involved). This is a topic that Jay, Dan, and I have discussed for doing an upcoming bootstrapping hour on (which also means it would have a long term archived version), and I think that's probably a better way to do a thing like this. As there is no owner for this, there is no one to pull it out of the agenda. But I think it's something that should be considered. Actually, it was me who added that to the cross-project session proposal etherpad :) But, that said, I agree with you that the format of the cross-project sessions are not ideal for this topic and it would be better as an archived OBH session. Best, -jay ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [All] Finalizing cross-project design summit track
On 10/29/2014 06:46 PM, Rochelle Grober wrote: Any chance we could use the opening to move either the Refstack session or the logging session from their current joint (and conflicting) time (15:40)? QA really would be appreciated at both. And I'd really like to be at both. I'd say the Refstack one would go better in the debug slot, as the API stuff is sort of related to the logging. Switching with one of the 14:50 sessions might also work. Just hoping. I really want great participation at all of these sessions. The gate debugging session is most likely going to be dropped at this point. I don't see a big problem with moving the refstack one to that slot (the first time). Anyone else have a strong opinion on this? -- Russell Bryant ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [All] Finalizing cross-project design summit track
On 10/29/2014 09:07 PM, Russell Bryant wrote: On 10/29/2014 06:46 PM, Rochelle Grober wrote: Any chance we could use the opening to move either the Refstack session or the logging session from their current joint (and conflicting) time (15:40)? QA really would be appreciated at both. And I'd really like to be at both. I'd say the Refstack one would go better in the debug slot, as the API stuff is sort of related to the logging. Switching with one of the 14:50 sessions might also work. Just hoping. I really want great participation at all of these sessions. The gate debugging session is most likely going to be dropped at this point. I don't see a big problem with moving the refstack one to that slot (the first time). Anyone else have a strong opinion on this? Sounds good to me. -jay ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [All] Finalizing cross-project design summit track
Thanks for your confirmation. Best Regards Chaoyi Huang ( joehuang ) From: Thierry Carrez [thie...@openstack.org] Sent: 29 October 2014 16:55 To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [All] Finalizing cross-project design summit track joehuang wrote: Is the cascading included in the session Approaches for scaling out [1] ? Yes it is. The goal of the session is to get the proponents of the various scaling out approaches in the same room so that they compare notes and potentially converge. -- Thierry Carrez (ttx) ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
[openstack-dev] [All] Finalizing cross-project design summit track
A draft schedule has been posted for the cross-project design summit track: http://kilodesignsummit.sched.org/overview/type/cross-project+workshops#.VFAFFXVGjUa If you have any schedule changes to propose for really bad conflicts, please let me know. We really tried to minimize conflicts, but it's impossible to resolve them all. The next steps are to identify session leads and get the leads to write session descriptions to put on the schedule. We're collecting both at the top of the proposals etherpad: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/kilo-crossproject-summit-topics If you were the proposer of one of these sessions and are not already listed as the session lead, please add yourself. If you'd like to volunteer to lead a session that doesn't have a lead, please speak up. For the sessions you are leading, please draft a description on the etherpad that can be used for the session on sched.org. Thank you! -- Russell Bryant ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [All] Finalizing cross-project design summit track
Hello, Russell, Is the cascading included in the session Approaches for scaling out [1] ? From the selected topics listed in [2], the selected topic is plans for scaling out OpenStack using cells * Session Lead: John Garbutt * Session Description: But according to the comments of TCs' [2], cells and cascading are merged in this session. All minus score on cascading is to ask the merge of cells and cascading: Could you pls confirm whether cascading is included in the Approaches for scaling out or not. If yes, I would like to add me as the co-lead with John Garbutt in this session. The comments from TCs are as following: 19. plans for scaling out OpenStack using cells: -1 / 3 19.1. (johnthetubaguy)Interested: jaypipes, edleafe (annegentle: I wonder if we can split up one slot for nova/glance/interaction?) +1(ttx) if merged with cascading session (#21) +1(dhellmann) Merge with cascading - let's pick one approach to this +1 (jeblair merge) +0 (mikal) how does this differ from the cells sessions in the nova track? -0 (sdague) honestly think that should just be in Nova track. -1 (russellb) We have 2 slots for this in the Nova track already. Nova needs to figure out if this is actually moving forward or not. 21. Introduce OpenStack cascading for integrating multi-site / multi-vendor / multi-version OpenStack instances into one cloud with OpenStack API exposed (Chaoyi Huang, joehu...@huawei.com): -4 / 2 21.1. -1(ttx) merge with the cells session (#19) so that both approaches are compared merge in cells session annegentle -1 (dhellmann) merge +2 (devananda) merge with cells discussion, and discuss both, -1 (jeblair merge) -1 (russellb) can be discussed as an alternative in the nova cells session. [1] http://kilodesignsummit.sched.org/type/cross-project+workshops [2] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/kilo-crossproject-summit-topics Best Regards Chaoyi Huang ( joehuang ) From: Russell Bryant [rbry...@redhat.com] Sent: 29 October 2014 5:22 To: OpenStack Development Mailing List Subject: [openstack-dev] [All] Finalizing cross-project design summit track A draft schedule has been posted for the cross-project design summit track: http://kilodesignsummit.sched.org/overview/type/cross-project+workshops#.VFAFFXVGjUa If you have any schedule changes to propose for really bad conflicts, please let me know. We really tried to minimize conflicts, but it's impossible to resolve them all. The next steps are to identify session leads and get the leads to write session descriptions to put on the schedule. We're collecting both at the top of the proposals etherpad: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/kilo-crossproject-summit-topics If you were the proposer of one of these sessions and are not already listed as the session lead, please add yourself. If you'd like to volunteer to lead a session that doesn't have a lead, please speak up. For the sessions you are leading, please draft a description on the etherpad that can be used for the session on sched.org. Thank you! -- Russell Bryant ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
