On 17/09/2014 23:12, Anita Kuno wrote: > On 09/17/2014 04:01 PM, Maish Saidel-Keesing wrote: >> This looks great - but I am afraid that something might be missing. >> >> As part of the Design summit in Atlanta there was an Ops Meetup track. >> [1] I do not see where this fits into the current planning process that >> has been posted. >> I would like to assume that part of the purpose of the summit is to also >> collect feedback from Enterprise Operators and also from smaller ones as >> well. >> >> If that is so then I would kindly request that there be some other way >> of allowing that part of the community to voice their concerns, and >> provide feedback. >> >> Perhaps a track that is not only Operator centric - but also an End-user >> focused one as well (mixing the two would be fine as well) >> >> Most of them are not on the openstack-dev list and they do not >> participate in the IRC team meetings, simply because they have no idea >> that these exist or maybe do not feel comfortable there. So they will >> not have any exposure to the process. >> >> My 0.02 Shekels. >> >> [1] - http://junodesignsummit.sched.org/overview/type/ops+meetup >> > Hi Maish: > > This thread is about the Design Summit, the Operators Track is a > different thing. > > In Atlanta the Operators Track was organized by Tom Fifield and I have > every confidence he is working hard to ensure the operators have a voice > in Paris and that those interested can participate. > > Last summit the Operators Track ran on the Monday and the Friday giving > folks who usually spend most of the time at the Design summit to > participate and hear the operator's voices. I know I did and I found it > highly educational. > > Thanks, > Anita. Thanks for the clarification Anita :) Maish >> >> On 12/09/2014 18:42, Thierry Carrez wrote: >>> Eoghan Glynn wrote: >>>>> If you think this is wrong and think the "design summit suggestion" >>>>> website is a better way to do it, let me know why! If some programs >>>>> really can't stand the 'etherpad/IRC' approach I'll see how we can spin >>>>> up a limited instance. >>>> +1 on a collaborative scheduling process within each project. >>>> >>>> That's pretty much what we did within the ceilometer core group for >>>> the Juno summit, except that we used a googledocs spreadsheet instead >>>> of an etherpad. >>>> >>>> So I don't think we need to necessarily mandate usage of an etherpad, >>>> just let every project decide whatever shared document format they >>>> want to use. >>>> >>>> FTR the benefit of a googledocs spreadsheet in my view would include >>>> the ease of totalling votes & sessions slots, color-coding candidate >>>> sessions for merging etc. >>> Good point. I've replaced the wording in the wiki page -- just use >>> whatever suits you best, as long as it's a public document and you can >>> link to it. >>> > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
-- Maish Saidel-Keesing _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev