Re: [openstack-dev] PTG? / Was (Consistent Versioned Endpoints)
On 13/01/17 14:50 -0800, Clint Byrum wrote: Excerpts from Fox, Kevin M's message of 2017-01-13 19:44:23 +: Don't want to hijack the thread too much but... when the PTG was being sold, it was a way to get the various developers in to one place and make it cheaper to go to for devs. Now it seems to be being made into a place where each of the silo's can co'exist but not talk, and then the summit is still required to get cross project work done, so it only increases the devs cost by requiring attendance at both. This is very troubling. :/ Whats the main benefit of the PTG then? I've come to the conclusion that this will still have a net positive effect for communication. The reason? Leaders. Not just PTL's, but all of those who are serving as leaders, whether formal or not. With the old system, the leaders of each project would be tasked with attending all of the summit sessions relevant to their project, whether cross-project, ops-centric, or project-centric. This was a full-time job for the entirety of the summit for many. As a result, leaders were unable to attend the conference portion of the event, which meant no socialization of what is actually happening with their work to the community. Basically the leadership was there to plan, facilitate, and listen, but not to present. They'd also be expected at the mid-cycle to help keep up on what's really coming down the pipe for the release vs. what was planned (and to help work on their own efforts for those with time left to do actual development). With the new system, the leadership will be at the PTG, and have dev-centric conversations related to planning all week, and probably be just as busy as they were at the summit and mid-cycle. But with that work done at the PTG, a project leader can attend the Forum and conference and actually participate fully in both. They can talk about the work the team is doing, they can showcase their company's offerings (let's keep the lights on please!) and they can spend time in the Forum on the things that they're needed for there (which should be a fraction of what they did at the dev summit). For operators, unless you're sponsoring work, you can ignore the PTG just like you ignored the mid-cycle. You can come to the forum and expect to see the most influential developers there, just like you would have seen them at the summit. But they will have a lot less to do that isn't listening to you or telling you what's happening in their projects. I've specifically heard the tales of developers, cornered in summit sessions, being clear that they simply don't have time to listen to the operators' needs. We can hope that this new scheme works against that feeling. So yeah, it's new and scary. But I got over my fear of the change, and I think you should too. Let's see how it goes, and reserve our final judgement until after the Forum. Loved the way you put it, Clint. I second this feeling too. Having the opportunity to focus on the PTG entirely and not having to multi-task across a gazillion of things is one of the things I'm definitely looking forward to. Cheers, Flavio -- @flaper87 Flavio Percoco signature.asc Description: PGP signature __ 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] PTG? / Was (Consistent Versioned Endpoints)
YEES! -Original Message- From: Tom Fifield [mailto:t...@openstack.org] Sent: Monday, January 16, 2017 3:48 AM To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] PTG? / Was (Consistent Versioned Endpoints) On 14/01/17 04:07, Joshua Harlow wrote: > > Sometimes I almost wish we just rented out a football stadium (or > equivalent, a soccer field?) and put all the contributors in the 'field' > with bean bags and some tables and a bunch of white boards (and a lot > of wifi and power cords) and let everyone 'have at it' (ideally in a > stadium with a roof in the winter). Maybe put all the infra people in > a circle in the middle and make the foundation people all wear referee > outfits. > > It'd be an interesting social experiment at least :-P I have been informed we have located at least 3 referee outfits across Foundation staff, along with a set of red/yellow cards. __ 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 __ 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] PTG? / Was (Consistent Versioned Endpoints)
On 14/01/17 04:07, Joshua Harlow wrote: Sometimes I almost wish we just rented out a football stadium (or equivalent, a soccer field?) and put all the contributors in the 'field' with bean bags and some tables and a bunch of white boards (and a lot of wifi and power cords) and let everyone 'have at it' (ideally in a stadium with a roof in the winter). Maybe put all the infra people in a circle in the middle and make the foundation people all wear referee outfits. It'd be an interesting social experiment at least :-P I have been informed we have located at least 3 referee outfits across Foundation staff, along with a set of red/yellow cards. __ 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] PTG? / Was (Consistent Versioned Endpoints)
Fox, Kevin M wrote: > Don't want to hijack the thread too much but... when the PTG was being sold, > it was a way to get the various developers in to one place and make it > cheaper to go to for devs. Now it seems to be being made into a place where > each of the silo's can co'exist but not talk, and then the summit is still > required to get cross project work done, so it only increases the devs cost > by requiring attendance at both. This is very troubling. :/ Whats the main > benefit of the PTG then? To me the main benefit is to separate the time we are trying to get things done /within/ development teams from the time we are trying to reach out /beyond/ development teams. For some teams it was really difficult to find time to listen to users and gather requirements while at the same time trying to build trust, priorities and organize work for the coming cycle, all within the same week. About "cross-project" work, the problem is (as always) that the term is *very* overloaded. There is actually two kinds of transversal work: - cross-community work: discussions between all segments of our community: developers, operators, app developers, organizations building products on top of OpenStack... This is for example about getting feedback on recent releases or features, or evolving stable or deprecation policies, or gathering requirements for future cycles (like the recent "what would you like to see in Pike" discussion on ops ML). This needs to happen in a forum where there is representation of all the segments, i.e. at the Summit. - inter-project work: discussions between a number of upstream project teams (for example Nova+Cinder, or all teams using oslo.privsep, or all devs working on a given release goal, or release liaisons giving feedback to the release management team, or people involved in consistent versioned endpoints). This is necessary to break the silos between teams, and will happen at the PTG. We'll use the week split to hopefully facilitate that cross-attendance (Mon-Tue vs. Wed-Fri), as well as a fishbowl room to schedule any necessary inter-project discussions. If this event format is not cutting it, we'll evolve it for PTG2. Obviously there are things that live close to the edge, and for which there might be a bit of overlap (I suspect we'll be discussing them in both venues). -- Thierry Carrez (ttx) __ 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] PTG? / Was (Consistent Versioned Endpoints)
Excerpts from Fox, Kevin M's message of 2017-01-13 19:44:23 +: > Don't want to hijack the thread too much but... when the PTG was being sold, > it was a way to get the various developers in to one place and make it > cheaper to go to for devs. Now it seems to be being made into a place where > each of the silo's can co'exist but not talk, and then the summit is still > required to get cross project work done, so it only increases the devs cost > by requiring attendance at both. This is very troubling. :/ Whats the main > benefit of the PTG then? > I've come to the conclusion that this will still have a net positive effect for communication. The reason? Leaders. Not just PTL's, but all of those who are serving as leaders, whether formal or not. With the old system, the leaders of each project would be tasked with attending all of the summit sessions relevant to their project, whether cross-project, ops-centric, or project-centric. This was a full-time job for the entirety of the summit for many. As a result, leaders were unable to attend the conference portion of the event, which meant no socialization of what is actually happening with their work to the community. Basically the leadership was there to plan, facilitate, and listen, but not to present. They'd also be expected at the mid-cycle to help keep up on what's really coming down the pipe for the release vs. what was planned (and to help work on their own efforts for those with time left to do actual development). With the new system, the leadership will be at the PTG, and have dev-centric conversations related to planning all week, and probably be just as busy as they were at the summit and mid-cycle. But with that work done at the PTG, a project leader can attend the Forum and conference and actually participate fully in both. They can talk about the work the team is doing, they can showcase their company's offerings (let's keep the lights on please!) and they can spend time in the Forum on the things that they're needed for there (which should be a fraction of what they did at the dev summit). For operators, unless you're sponsoring work, you can ignore the PTG just like you ignored the mid-cycle. You can come to the forum and expect to see the most influential developers there, just like you would have seen them at the summit. But they will have a lot less to do that isn't listening to you or telling you what's happening in their projects. I've specifically heard the tales of developers, cornered in summit sessions, being clear that they simply don't have time to listen to the operators' needs. We can hope that this new scheme works against that feeling. So yeah, it's new and scary. But I got over my fear of the change, and I think you should too. Let's see how it goes, and reserve our final judgement until after the Forum. __ 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] PTG? / Was (Consistent Versioned Endpoints)
Fox, Kevin M wrote: Don't want to hijack the thread too much but... when the PTG was being sold, it was a way to get the various developers in to one place and make it cheaper to go to for devs. Now it seems to be being made into a place where each of the silo's can co'exist but not talk, and then the summit is still required to get cross project work done, so it only increases the devs cost by requiring attendance at both. This is very troubling. :/ Whats the main benefit of the PTG then? Thanks, Kevin Sometimes I almost wish we just rented out a football stadium (or equivalent, a soccer field?) and put all the contributors in the 'field' with bean bags and some tables and a bunch of white boards (and a lot of wifi and power cords) and let everyone 'have at it' (ideally in a stadium with a roof in the winter). Maybe put all the infra people in a circle in the middle and make the foundation people all wear referee outfits. It'd be an interesting social experiment at least :-P __ 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] PTG? / Was (Consistent Versioned Endpoints)
Don't want to hijack the thread too much but... when the PTG was being sold, it was a way to get the various developers in to one place and make it cheaper to go to for devs. Now it seems to be being made into a place where each of the silo's can co'exist but not talk, and then the summit is still required to get cross project work done, so it only increases the devs cost by requiring attendance at both. This is very troubling. :/ Whats the main benefit of the PTG then? Thanks, Kevin From: Thierry Carrez [thie...@openstack.org] Sent: Friday, January 13, 2017 6:54 AM To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] Consistent Versioned Endpoints Sean Dague wrote: > On 01/12/2017 01:35 PM, Scott D'Angelo wrote: >> [...] >> Can we get to this "perfect world"? Let's discuss at the PTG. >> It is my understanding that we do not have the ability to schedule a >> time or room for such a cross-project discussion. Please chime in if >> interested, and/or make your interest known to scottda, mordred, or edleafe. > > Happy to join in on this, it does seem weird there is no time / space > for such things at PTG. We'll have a room available for such inter-team discussions at the PTG. However, since only a fragment of our community will be present at the PTG, we need to be careful to avoid exclusion. Ideally we would only use that room to discuss things that are only relevant to upstream development teams, and use the "Forum" in Boston to hold truly cross-project / community-wide discussions. The typical target for the discussion room at the PTG are therefore ad-hoc discussions between PTG teams, where a separate fishbowl room makes more sense than holding it in a specific team room. As far as scheduling goes, the "discussion" room at the PTG should be available from Monday to Thursday, and scheduled in unconference-style, to give flexibility to have the discussions we need to have. Current plan is to use an ethercalc document to share the schedule. For critical discussions (which don't belong to any given room, fit the cross-section of our community present, and/or can't wait until Boston) we could totally hardcode them in the schedule for the discussion room... but we should probably keep those to a minimum and use team rooms as much as possible. How much time do you think that discussion would need ? If more than a few hours it's probably just simpler to give it a full team room. -- Thierry Carrez (ttx) __ 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 __ 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
