Ewan Mellor wrote: > Following on from the IRC discussion today: I agree with Josh that an events > committee is a good idea. That way, we can discuss registration rules > broadly, because obviously a lot of people want to have input. > > This is particularly true if Thierry doesn't actually want to organize > registration. I expect that he's got enough on his plate getting Essex out > the door in good shape, so we should give this (frankly thankless) task to > other people, and save Thierry the heartache.
That's how it happened last time. This time around, the idea was to split the load between PTLs: invite known contributors and give the PTLs loads of invites so that they can ultimately get the people they want in the room. > Let's get ~5 people to put together a committee, and they can get this aired > and resolved. FWIW, the design summit organization committee already exists: it's formed (like it was in all previous editions) by the upcoming elected PTLs + the release manager. The idea is that the summit is held for the PTLs -- they decide how they want to run it to be most effective. The plan was to have (like in all previous editions) this new group discuss the format, number of tracks, etc. for the summit. Unfortunately, there are some decisions about the summit that need to be taken *before* we know the names of the next PTLs, like registration rules, number of rooms etc. And for those, like in previous editions, the RAX events team (who organizes the event) made some decisions... There is definitely room for improvement here, and I'm very open to suggestions -- though most of this should get overhauled anyway once the foundation is set up. -- Thierry Carrez (ttx) Release Manager, OpenStack _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack-poc Post to : openstack-poc@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack-poc More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp