Re: [openstack-dev] Fwd: Denver Ops Meetup post-mortem
The issue I ran into with IRC was a bit more obscure. "real IRC" is entirely blocked from all networks provided to me by my employer (even the office wifi). The web interface I was using (irccloud) didn't work for nickname registration either. When trying real (non-web-wrapped) IRC from my laptop via an LTE hotspot it also failed. We eventually worked out that it's because Freenode has blacklisted large IP ranges including my AT service. Can't connect unless authenticated, can't register nickname for auth because not connected. The answer in that case is to register the nickname on http://webchat.freenode.net This "chicken and egg" problem is explained here: https://superuser.com/questions/1220409/irc-how-to-register-on-freenode-using-hexchat-when-i-get-disconnected-immediat Chris On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 12:18 AM Kendall Nelson wrote: > Hello! > > On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 12:36 PM Chris Morgan wrote: > >> >> >> -- Forwarded message - >> From: Chris Morgan >> Date: Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 2:13 PM >> Subject: Denver Ops Meetup post-mortem >> To: OpenStack Operators >> >> >> Hello All, >> Last week we had a successful Ops Meetup embedded in the OpenStack >> Project Team Gathering in Denver. >> >> Despite generally being a useful gathering, there were definitely lessons >> learned and things to work on, so I thought it would be useful to share a >> post-mortem. I encourage everyone to share their thoughts on this as well. >> >> What went well: >> >> - some of the sessions were great and a lot of progress was made >> - overall attendance in the ops room was good >> - more developers were able to join the discussions >> - facilities were generally fine >> - some operators leveraged being at PTG to have useful involvement in >> other sessions/discussions such as Keystone, User Committee, Self-Healing >> SIG, not to mention the usual "hallway conversations", and similarly some >> project devs were able to bring pressing questions directly to operators. >> >> What didn't go so well: >> >> - Merging into upgrade SIG didn't go particularly well >> - fewer ops attended (in particular there were fewer from outside the US) >> - Some of the proposed sessions were not well vetted >> - some ops who did attend stated the event identity was diluted, it was >> less attractive >> - we tried to adjust the day 2 schedule to include late submissions, >> however it was probably too late in some cases >> >> I don't think it's so important to drill down into all the whys and >> wherefores of how we fell down here except to say that the ops meetups team >> is a small bunch of volunteers all with day jobs (presumably just like >> everyone else on this mailing list). The usual, basically. >> >> Much more important : what will be done to improve things going forward: >> >> - The User Committee has offered to get involved with the technical >> content. In particular to bring forward topics from other relevant events >> into the ops meetup planning process, and then take output from ops meetups >> forward to subsequent events. We (ops meetup team) have welcomed this. >> >> - The Ops Meetups Team will endeavor to start topic selection earlier and >> have a more critical approach. Having a longer list of possible sessions >> (when starting with material from earlier events) should make it at least >> possible to devise a better agenda. Agenda quality drives attendance to >> some extent and so can ensure a virtuous circle. >> >> - We need to work out whether we're doing fixed schedule events (similar >> to previous mid-cycle Ops Meetups) or fully flexible PTG-style events, but >> grafting one onto the other ad-hoc clearly is a terrible idea. This needs >> more discussion. >> >> - The Ops Meetups Team continues to explore strange new worlds, or at >> least get in touch with more and more OpenStack operators to find out what >> the meetups team and these events could do for them and hence drive the >> process better. One specific work item here is to help the (widely >> disparate) operator community with technical issues such as getting setup >> with the openstack git/gerrit and IRC. The latter is the preferred way for >> the community to meet, but is particularly difficult now with the >> registered nickname requirement. We will add help documentation on how to >> get over this hurdle. >> > > After you get onto freenode at IRC you can register your nickname with a > single command and then you should be able to join any of the channels. The > command you need: ' /msg nickserv register $PASSWORD $EMAIL_ADDRESS'. You > can find more instructions here about setting up IRC[1]. > > If you get stuck or have any questions, please let me know! I am happy to > help with the setup of IRC or gerrit or anything else that might be a > barrier. > > >> - YOUR SUGGESTION HERE >> >> Chris >> >> -- >> Chris Morgan >> >> >> -- >> Chris Morgan >> __ >> OpenStack
Re: [openstack-dev] Fwd: Denver Ops Meetup post-mortem
Hello! On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 12:36 PM Chris Morgan wrote: > > > -- Forwarded message - > From: Chris Morgan > Date: Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 2:13 PM > Subject: Denver Ops Meetup post-mortem > To: OpenStack Operators > > > Hello All, > Last week we had a successful Ops Meetup embedded in the OpenStack > Project Team Gathering in Denver. > > Despite generally being a useful gathering, there were definitely lessons > learned and things to work on, so I thought it would be useful to share a > post-mortem. I encourage everyone to share their thoughts on this as well. > > What went well: > > - some of the sessions were great and a lot of progress was made > - overall attendance in the ops room was good > - more developers were able to join the discussions > - facilities were generally fine > - some operators leveraged being at PTG to have useful involvement in > other sessions/discussions such as Keystone, User Committee, Self-Healing > SIG, not to mention the usual "hallway conversations", and similarly some > project devs were able to bring pressing questions directly to operators. > > What didn't go so well: > > - Merging into upgrade SIG didn't go particularly well > - fewer ops attended (in particular there were fewer from outside the US) > - Some of the proposed sessions were not well vetted > - some ops who did attend stated the event identity was diluted, it was > less attractive > - we tried to adjust the day 2 schedule to include late submissions, > however it was probably too late in some cases > > I don't think it's so important to drill down into all the whys and > wherefores of how we fell down here except to say that the ops meetups team > is a small bunch of volunteers all with day jobs (presumably just like > everyone else on this mailing list). The usual, basically. > > Much more important : what will be done to improve things going forward: > > - The User Committee has offered to get involved with the technical > content. In particular to bring forward topics from other relevant events > into the ops meetup planning process, and then take output from ops meetups > forward to subsequent events. We (ops meetup team) have welcomed this. > > - The Ops Meetups Team will endeavor to start topic selection earlier and > have a more critical approach. Having a longer list of possible sessions > (when starting with material from earlier events) should make it at least > possible to devise a better agenda. Agenda quality drives attendance to > some extent and so can ensure a virtuous circle. > > - We need to work out whether we're doing fixed schedule events (similar > to previous mid-cycle Ops Meetups) or fully flexible PTG-style events, but > grafting one onto the other ad-hoc clearly is a terrible idea. This needs > more discussion. > > - The Ops Meetups Team continues to explore strange new worlds, or at > least get in touch with more and more OpenStack operators to find out what > the meetups team and these events could do for them and hence drive the > process better. One specific work item here is to help the (widely > disparate) operator community with technical issues such as getting setup > with the openstack git/gerrit and IRC. The latter is the preferred way for > the community to meet, but is particularly difficult now with the > registered nickname requirement. We will add help documentation on how to > get over this hurdle. > After you get onto freenode at IRC you can register your nickname with a single command and then you should be able to join any of the channels. The command you need: ' /msg nickserv register $PASSWORD $EMAIL_ADDRESS'. You can find more instructions here about setting up IRC[1]. If you get stuck or have any questions, please let me know! I am happy to help with the setup of IRC or gerrit or anything else that might be a barrier. > - YOUR SUGGESTION HERE > > Chris > > -- > Chris Morgan > > > -- > Chris Morgan > __ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev -Kendall Nelson (diablo_rojo) [1] https://docs.openstack.org/contributors/common/irc.html# __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] Fwd: Denver Ops Meetup post-mortem
Thanks for the thorough write-up as well as the detailed feedback. I'm including some of my notes from the Ops Meetup Feedback session just a bit below, as well as some comments inline. One of the critical things that would help both the Ops and Dev community is to have a holistic sense of what the Ops Meetup goals are. * Were the goals well defined ahead of the event? * Were they achieved and/or how can the larger OpenStack community help them achieve them? From our discussion at the Feedback session, this isn't something that has been tracked in the past. Having actionable, measurable goals coming out of the Ops Meetup could go a long way towards helping the projects realize them. Per our discussion, being able to present this list to the User Committee would be a good step forward for each event. I wasn't able to attend the entire time, but a couple of interesting notes: * The knowledge of deployment tools seemed pretty fragmented and it seemed like there was a desire for more clear and comprehensive documentation comparing the different deployment options, as well as documentation about how to get started with a POC. * Bare Metal in the Datacenter: It was clear that we need more Ironic 101 content and education, including how to get started, system requirements, etc. We can dig up presentations from previous Summits and also talked to TheJulia about potentially hosting a community meeting or producing another video leading up to the Berlin Summit. * Here are the notes from the sessions in case anyone on the ops list is interested: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/ops-meetup-ptg-denver-2018 It looks like there were some action items documented at the bottom of this etherpad: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/ops-denver-2018-further-work Ops Meetup Feedback Takeways from Feedback Session not covered below (mostly from https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/uc-stein-ptg) Chris Morgan wrote: --SNIP -- What went well - some of the sessions were great and a lot of progress was made - overall attendance in the ops room was good We had to add 5 tables to accommodate the additional attendees. It was a great crowd! - more developers were able to join the discussions Given that this is something that wouldn't happen at a normal Ops Meetup, is there a way that would meet the Ops Community needs that we could help facilitate this int he future? - facilities were generally fine - some operators leveraged being at PTG to have useful involvement in other sessions/discussions such as Keystone, User Committee, Self-Healing SIG, not to mention the usual "hallway conversations", and similarly some project devs were able to bring pressing questions directly to operators. What didn't go so well: - Merging into upgrade SIG didn't go particularly well This is a tough one b/c of the fluidity of the PTG. Agreed that one can end up missing a good chunk of the discussion. OTOH, the flexibility of hte event is what allows great discussions to take place. In the future, I think better coordination w/ specific project teams + updating the PTGBot could help make sure the schedules are in synch. - fewer ops attended (in particular there were fewer from outside the US) Do you have demographics on the Ops Meetup in Japan or NY? Curious to know how those compare to what we saw in Denver. If there is more promotion needed, or indeed these just end up being more continent/regionally focused? - Some of the proposed sessions were not well vetted Are there any suggestions on how to improve this moving forward? Perhaps a CFP style submission process, with a small vetting group, could help this situation? My understanding was the Tokyo event, co-located with OpenStack Days, didn't suffer this problem. - some ops who did attend stated the event identity was diluted, it was less attractive I'd love some more info on this. Please have these people reach out to let me know how we can fix this in the future. Even if we decide not to hold another Ops Meetup at a PTG, this is relevant to how we run events. - we tried to adjust the day 2 schedule to include late submissions, however it was probably too late in some cases I don't think it's so important to drill down into all the whys and wherefores of how we fell down here except to say that the ops meetups team is a small bunch of volunteers all with day jobs (presumably just like everyone else on this mailing list). The usual, basically. Much more important : what will be done to improve things going forward: - The User Committee has offered to get involved with the technical content. In particular to bring forward topics from other relevant events into the ops meetup planning process, and then take output from ops meetups forward to subsequent events. We (ops meetup team) have welcomed this. This is super critical IMO. One of the things we discussed at the Ops Meetup Feedback session (co-located
[openstack-dev] Fwd: Denver Ops Meetup post-mortem
-- Forwarded message - From: Chris Morgan Date: Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 2:13 PM Subject: Denver Ops Meetup post-mortem To: OpenStack Operators Hello All, Last week we had a successful Ops Meetup embedded in the OpenStack Project Team Gathering in Denver. Despite generally being a useful gathering, there were definitely lessons learned and things to work on, so I thought it would be useful to share a post-mortem. I encourage everyone to share their thoughts on this as well. What went well: - some of the sessions were great and a lot of progress was made - overall attendance in the ops room was good - more developers were able to join the discussions - facilities were generally fine - some operators leveraged being at PTG to have useful involvement in other sessions/discussions such as Keystone, User Committee, Self-Healing SIG, not to mention the usual "hallway conversations", and similarly some project devs were able to bring pressing questions directly to operators. What didn't go so well: - Merging into upgrade SIG didn't go particularly well - fewer ops attended (in particular there were fewer from outside the US) - Some of the proposed sessions were not well vetted - some ops who did attend stated the event identity was diluted, it was less attractive - we tried to adjust the day 2 schedule to include late submissions, however it was probably too late in some cases I don't think it's so important to drill down into all the whys and wherefores of how we fell down here except to say that the ops meetups team is a small bunch of volunteers all with day jobs (presumably just like everyone else on this mailing list). The usual, basically. Much more important : what will be done to improve things going forward: - The User Committee has offered to get involved with the technical content. In particular to bring forward topics from other relevant events into the ops meetup planning process, and then take output from ops meetups forward to subsequent events. We (ops meetup team) have welcomed this. - The Ops Meetups Team will endeavor to start topic selection earlier and have a more critical approach. Having a longer list of possible sessions (when starting with material from earlier events) should make it at least possible to devise a better agenda. Agenda quality drives attendance to some extent and so can ensure a virtuous circle. - We need to work out whether we're doing fixed schedule events (similar to previous mid-cycle Ops Meetups) or fully flexible PTG-style events, but grafting one onto the other ad-hoc clearly is a terrible idea. This needs more discussion. - The Ops Meetups Team continues to explore strange new worlds, or at least get in touch with more and more OpenStack operators to find out what the meetups team and these events could do for them and hence drive the process better. One specific work item here is to help the (widely disparate) operator community with technical issues such as getting setup with the openstack git/gerrit and IRC. The latter is the preferred way for the community to meet, but is particularly difficult now with the registered nickname requirement. We will add help documentation on how to get over this hurdle. - YOUR SUGGESTION HERE Chris -- Chris Morgan -- Chris Morgan __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
