On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 2:26 PM, Jesse Keating <j...@bluebox.net> wrote: > BoD, unless they feel the need to delegate, at which point then maybe an > Operators committee. But I'd hate to see more committees created.
I feel like this may be a User Committee thing, which is an existing committee and sort-of-kind-of how this started I think. Granted that's a bit of a shadowy cabal at this point but hopefully we're on a path to a better place with that... -Jon > > - jlk > > On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 11:23 AM, Matt Fischer <m...@mattfischer.com> wrote: >> >> Are you proposing an Operators committee or do you mean the OpenStack BoD? >> >> On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 12:15 PM, Jesse Keating <j...@bluebox.net> wrote: >>> >>> Honestly I'm fine with the elected board helping to make this decision. >>> Folks that want to underwrite the event can submit a proposal to host, board >>> picks from the submissions? Having a wide vote on it seems overkill to me. >>> >>> Open call for submissions, board votes. Is that unreasonable? >>> >>> >>> - jlk >>> >>> On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 8:23 AM, Tom Fifield <t...@openstack.org> wrote: >>>> >>>> OK, so I'm just going to throw this one out there to re-stoke the >>>> discussion ... >>>> >>>> Venue selection process. >>>> >>>> At the moment, there's a few of us who work hard in the shadows to make >>>> the best choice we can from a range of generous offers :) >>>> >>>> In our brave new world, I think this should be a bit more open, what do >>>> you think? >>>> >>>> What kind of structure do we need to make the best decision? >>>> >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> >>>> >>>> Tom >>>> >>>> >>>> On 01/07/15 15:29, Tom Fifield wrote: >>>> > Team, >>>> > >>>> > It's great to see so much passion! :) >>>> > >>>> > Here's an attempt at a summary email. I'll wait until a later email to >>>> > wade into the discussion myself ;) Feel free to jump in on any point. >>>> > >>>> > =Things we tend to agree on= >>>> > "Spirit of the event" >>>> > * The response most people had in common was that they didn't want to >>>> > see vendor booths :) Several others noted the importance that the >>>> > event >>>> > should remain accessible and ensure there were no barriers to >>>> > attendance, space for networking with others and sharing information >>>> > about deployments without fear of vendor harassment. >>>> > >>>> > Multiple Sponsors >>>> > * are OK, but they are more like underwriters who should be OK with >>>> > only >>>> > modest acknowledgement (see previous: no booths). Preference for >>>> > operator sponsors. Several ways to recognise them possible. >>>> > >>>> > Current Schedule Format >>>> > * It appeared like the current format is working well in general, but >>>> > could do with minor tweaks. >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > =Things still under discussion= >>>> > Sell Tickets >>>> > * Many people agreed that some moderate form of ticketing could be OK, >>>> > but the question remains to what extent this should be priced ("low >>>> > fee"? $100-200? "cover costs"?). A strong counterpoint was that paid >>>> > ticketing makes it less accessible (see "spirit"), prevents some local >>>> > attendance, and is unfair to smaller operators, though others noted >>>> > that >>>> > it may be the only practical way to raise funds in the future. >>>> > >>>> > Break into Regional Events >>>> > * A number of viewpoints, ranging from "multiple regional events" to >>>> > "one event only [maybe with a travel fund]" to "one event that moves >>>> > around [maybe even outside USA]" to "make it in the centre of USA for >>>> > easier travel on average". >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > Capping Numbers (inc. Limit Attendees per Company) >>>> > * A lot of disagreement here. Many argued that any kind of cap or >>>> > barrier to entry detracts from the accessibility of the event. Others >>>> > put forth that too few restrictions could dilute the ops-heavy >>>> > attendee >>>> > base, and implied that large companies might send too many people. >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > Multiple Tracks >>>> > * To help deal with room size, we could split into multiple tracks. >>>> > The >>>> > ideal number of tracks is not clear at this stage. >>>> > >>>> > Evening Event >>>> > * Several people said they found the PHL evening event uncomfortably >>>> > packed, and suggested cancelling it on this basis, or on the basis of >>>> > cost. Suggested alternate was posting a list of nearby venues. >>>> > >>>> > Lightening Talks >>>> > * Have lightening talks, perhaps by renaming "show and tell". More of >>>> > them? Arranged differently? Unclear. >>>> > >>>> > =Ideas= >>>> > * Video Recording - Might be worth a shot, starting small. >>>> > * Travel Fund, Scholarship Fund, Slush Fund >>>> > * Use Universities during the summer break for venues >>>> > >>>> > =Open Questions= >>>> > * How will the number of attendees grow? >>>> > * What are the costs involved in hosting one of these events? >>>> > * Stuff about the summit - probably need a different thread for this >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > Regards, >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > Tom >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > On 30/06/15 12:33, Tom Fifield wrote: >>>> >> Hi all, >>>> >> >>>> >> Right now, behind-the-scenes, we're working on getting a venue for >>>> >> next >>>> >> ops mid-cycle. It's taking a little longer than normal, but rest >>>> >> assured >>>> >> it is happening. >>>> >> >>>> >> Why is it so difficult? As you may have noticed, we're reaching the >>>> >> size >>>> >> of event where both physically and financially, only the largest >>>> >> organisations can host us. >>>> >> >>>> >> We thought we might get away with organising this one old-school with >>>> >> a >>>> >> single host and sponsor. Then, for the next, start a brainstorming >>>> >> discussion with you about how we scale these events into the future - >>>> >> since once we get up and beyond a few hundred people, we're looking >>>> >> at >>>> >> having to hire a venue as well as make some changes to the format of >>>> >> the >>>> >> event. >>>> >> >>>> >> However, it seems that even this might be too late. We already had a >>>> >> company that proposed to host the meetup at a west coast US hotel >>>> >> instead of their place, and wanted to scope out other companies to >>>> >> sponsor food. >>>> >> >>>> >> This would be a change in the model, so let's commence the discussion >>>> >> of >>>> >> how we want to scale this event :) >>>> >> >>>> >> So far I've heard things like: >>>> >> * "my $CORPORATE_BENEFACTOR would be fine to share sponsorship with >>>> >> others" >>>> >> * "I really don't want to get to the point where we want booths at >>>> >> the >>>> >> ops meetup" >>>> >> >>>> >> Which are promising! It seems like we have a shared understanding of >>>> >> what to take this forward with. >>>> >> >>>> >> So, as the ops meetup grows - what would it look like for you? >>>> >> >>>> >> How do you think we can manage the venue selection and financial side >>>> >> of >>>> >> things? What about the session layout and the scheduling with the >>>> >> growing numbers of attendees? >>>> >> >>>> >> Current data can be found at >>>> >> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Operations/Meetups#Venue_Selection . >>>> >> >>>> >> I would also be interested in your thoughts about how these events >>>> >> have >>>> >> only been in a limited geographical area so far, and how we can >>>> >> address >>>> >> that issue. >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> Regards, >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> Tom >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> _______________________________________________ >>>> >> OpenStack-operators mailing list >>>> >> OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org >>>> >> >>>> >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators >>>> >> >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > _______________________________________________ >>>> > OpenStack-operators mailing list >>>> > OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org >>>> > >>>> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators >>>> > >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> OpenStack-operators mailing list >>>> OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org >>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> OpenStack-operators mailing list >>> OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org >>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators >>> >> > > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-operators mailing list > OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators > _______________________________________________ OpenStack-operators mailing list OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators