Kendall, I would like to be the Trove liaison, and would like to participate in Upstream University next time around.
With that said, the answers to Sean's original question. I ran the room for the Trove team, I think it was a welcome addition. What went well: I think it was a good opportunity for the project to get new contributors (update: if you are interested in contributing to an openstack project, trove is looking for new participants). It would have been nice to have them video taped. -amrith -amrith -- Amrith Kumar Phone: +1-978-563-9590 On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 6:20 PM, Kendall Nelson <[email protected]> wrote: > @Nikhil, we (the organizers of Upstream Institute) sent a few emails > [1][2] out to the dev mailing list asking for help and representatives from > various projects to attend and get involved. We are also working on > building a network of project liaisons to direct newcomers to in each > project. Would you be interested in being our Glance liaison? > > Let me know if you have any other Upstream Institute questions! > > - Kendall(diablo_rojo) > > [1] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2017- > January/110788.html > [2] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2016- > November/108084.html > > On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 4:03 PM Nikhil Komawar <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Project: Glance >> >> Attendees: ~15 >> >> What was done: >> >> We started by introducing the core team (or whatever existed then), did a >> run down of Glance API documentation especially for developers, other >> references like notes for ops, best practices. We went through the >> architecture of the project. A few were interested in knowing more details >> and going in depth so we discussed the design patterns that exist today, >> scope of improvements and any blackholes therein, auxiliary services and >> performance tradeoffs etc. A lot of the discussion was free form so people >> asked questions and session was interactive. >> >> >> What worked: >> >> 1. The projector worked! >> >> 2. Session was free form, there was good turnout and it was interactive. >> (all the good things) >> >> 3. People were serious about contributing as per their >> availability/capacity to do upstream and one person showed up asking to do >> reviews. >> >> >> Lessons: >> >> 1. Could have been advertised more at least the session description more >> customized. >> >> 2. A representative from the team could have been officially invited to >> the upstream institute training. >> >> 3. The community building sessions and on-boarding sessions seem to >> overlap a bit so a representative from the team could be help in those >> sessions for Q&A or more interaction. Probably more collaboration/prep >> before the summit for such things. ($0.02) >> >> >> Cheers >> >> On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 1:27 PM, Jay S Bryant <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Project: Cinder >>> >>> Attendees: Approximately 30 >>> >>> I was really pleased by the number of people that attended the Cinder >>> session and the fact that they people in the room seemed engaged with the >>> presentation and asked good questions showing interest in the project. I >>> think having the on-boardings rooms was beneficial and hopefully something >>> that we can continue. >>> >>> Given the number of people in the room we didn't go around and introduce >>> everyone. I did have the Sean McGinnis introduce himself as PTL and had >>> the other Cinder Core members introduce themselves so that the attendees >>> could put faces with our names. >>> >>> From there we kicked off the presentation [1] which covered the >>> following high level topics: >>> >>> - Introduction of Cinder's Repos and components >>> - Quick overview of Cinder's architecture/organization >>> - Pointers to the Upstream Institute education (Might have done a >>> bit of a sales pitch for the next session here ;-)) >>> - Expanded upon the Upstream Institute education to explain how what >>> was taught there specifically applied to Cinder >>> - Walked through the main Cinder code tree >>> - Described how to test changes to Cinder >>> >>> My presentation was designed to assume that attendees had been through >>> Upstream Institute. I had coverage in the slides in case they had not been >>> through the education. Unfortunately most of the class had not been >>> through the education so I did spend a portion of time re-iterating those >>> concepts and less time was able to be spent at the end going through real >>> world examples of working with changes in Cinder. I got feedback from a >>> few people that having some real hands on coding examples would have been >>> helpful. >>> >>> One way we could possible handle this is to split the on-boarding to a >>> introduction section and then a more advanced second session. The other >>> option is that we require people who are attending the on-boarding to have >>> been through Upstream Institute. Something to think about. >>> >>> I think it was unfortunate that the session wasn't recorded. We shared >>> a lot of good information (between good questions and having a good >>> representation of Cinder's Core team in the room) that it would have been >>> nice to capture. Given this I am planning at some point in the near future >>> to work with Walt Boring to record a version of the presentation that can >>> be uploaded to our Cinder YouTube channel and include some coding examples. >>> >>> In summary, I think the on-boarding rooms were a great addition and the >>> Cinder team is pleased with how we used the time. I think it is something >>> we would like to continue to invest time into developing and improving. >>> >>> Jay >>> >>> [1] https://www.slideshare.net/JayBryant2/openstack-cinder- >>> onboarding-education-boston-summit-2017 >>> >>> >>> On 5/19/2017 3:43 PM, Lance Bragstad wrote: >>> >>> Project: Keystone >>> Attendees: 12 - 15 >>> >>> We conflicted with one of the Baremetal/VM sessions >>> >>> I attempted to document most of the session in my recap [0]. >>> >>> We started out by doing a round-the-room of introductions so that folks >>> could put IRC nicks to faces (we also didn't have a packed room so this >>> went pretty quick). After that we cruised through a summary of keystone, >>> the format of the projects, and the various processes we use. All of this >>> took *maybe* 30 minutes. >>> >>> From there we had an open discussion and things evolved organically. We >>> ended up going through: >>> >>> - the differences between the v2.0 and v3 APIs >>> - keystonemiddleware architecture, how it aids services, and how it >>> interacts with keystone >>> - we essentially followed an API call for creating a instance >>> from keystone -> nova -> glance >>> - how authentication scoping works and why it works that way >>> - how federation works and why it's setup the way it is >>> - how federated authentication works (https://goo.gl/NfY3mr) >>> >>> All of this was pretty well-received and generated a lot of productive >>> discussion. We also had several seasoned keystone contributors in the room, >>> which helped a lot. Most of the attendees were all curious about similar >>> topics, which was great, but we totally could have split into separate >>> groups given the experience we had in the room (we'll save that in our back >>> pocket for next time). >>> >>> [0] https://www.lbragstad.com/blog/openstack-boston-summit-recap >>> [1] https://www.slideshare.net/LanceBragstad/keystone-project-onboarding >>> >>> On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 10:37 AM, Michał Jastrzębski <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Kolla: >>>> Attendees - full room (20-30?) >>>> Notes - Conflict with kolla-k8s demo probably didn't help >>>> >>>> While we didn't have etherpad, slides, recording (and video dongle >>>> that could fit my laptop), we had great session with analog tools >>>> (whiteboard and my voice chords). We walked through architecture of >>>> each Kolla project, how they relate to each other and so on. >>>> >>>> Couple things to take out from our onboarding: >>>> 1. Bring dongles >>>> 2. We could've used bigger room - people were leaving because we had >>>> no chairs left >>>> 3. Recording would be awesome >>>> 4. Low tech is not a bad tech >>>> >>>> All and all, when we started session I didn't know what to expect or >>>> what people will expect so we just...rolled with it, and people seemed >>>> to be happy with it:) I think onboarding rooms were great idea (kudos >>>> to whoever came up with it)! I'll be happy to run it again in Sydney. >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Michal >>>> >>>> >>>> On 19 May 2017 at 08:12, Julien Danjou <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> > On Fri, May 19 2017, Sean Dague wrote: >>>> > >>>> >> If you ran a room, please post the project, what you did in the room, >>>> >> what you think worked, what you would have done differently. If you >>>> >> attended a room you didn't run, please provide feedback about which >>>> one >>>> >> it was, and what you thought worked / didn't work from the other >>>> side of >>>> >> the table. >>>> > >>>> > We shared a room for Telemetry and CloudKitty for 90 minutes. >>>> > I was there with Gordon Chung for Telemetry. >>>> > Christophe Sauthier was there for CloudKitty. >>>> > >>>> > We only had 3 people showing up in the session. One wanted to read his >>>> > emails in a quiet room, the two others had a couple of question on >>>> > Telemetry – though it was not really related to contribution as far >>>> as I >>>> > can recall. >>>> > >>>> > I had to leave after 45 minutes because they was an overlap with a >>>> talk >>>> > I was doing and rescheduling did not seem possible. And everybody >>>> left a >>>> > few minutes after I left apparently. >>>> > >>>> > -- >>>> > Julien Danjou >>>> > -- Free Software hacker >>>> > -- https://julien.danjou.info >>>> > >>>> > ____________________________________________________________ >>>> ______________ >>>> > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) >>>> > Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject: >>>> unsubscribe >>>> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >>>> > >>>> >>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>> ______________ >>>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) >>>> Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject: >>>> unsubscribe >>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> __________________________________________________________________________ >>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) >>> Unsubscribe: >>> [email protected]?subject:unsubscribehttp://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >>> >>> >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> ______________ >>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) >>> Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject: >>> unsubscribe >>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> -- >> Thanks, >> Nikhil >> ____________________________________________________________ >> ______________ >> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) >> Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject: >> unsubscribe >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >> > > __________________________________________________________________________ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > >
__________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
