On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 5:53 AM, Ina Panova <[email protected]> wrote:
> I think it is important to keep 2 sections: > 1) Community updates - which would tackle community contributions and > everything related to the spread of our project awareness. > 2) Release updates- which would take care of RFEs, bugfixes, issues, > releases, future plans we are heading to, etc > > Maybe as a starting point we should define as a team what we expect to > have in those 2 sections, since it might turn out everyone would have its > different expectations. > +1 on Ina's suggestion. I also see the value in having both the sections during sprint demo. > > > > > -------- > Regards, > > Ina Panova > Software Engineer| Pulp| Red Hat Inc. > > "Do not go where the path may lead, > go instead where there is no path and leave a trail." > > On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 9:48 PM, Brian Bouterse <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> I've thought about this some more and given my role as the community >> manager, I would like to host the demos and deliver the content I have >> planned. This is what I see from other projects like Foreman. This content >> regularly conflicts with the "State of Pulp" content. The YouTube live >> demos are something I started for Pulp, and something I would like to stay >> involved with. >> >> I want to go back to @asmacdo's idea of renaming the State of Pulp to >> "Release Updates". You're welcome to deliver that or someone who does the >> releases themselves would be good. Some feedback on this change would be >> great. >> >> Thanks, >> Brian >> >> >> >> On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 2:19 PM, Michael Hrivnak <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Sure, I'd be happy to do that. I do think there's plenty of room for a >>> "What's happening with the technology" segment and a "What else is going on >>> in the community" segment if you'd like to keep doing highlights there, but >>> otherwise I am happy to take care of it. >>> >>> On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 9:43 AM, Brian Bouterse <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> The content you are describing is the same content I usually plan to >>>> cover also. Then on the day-of we realize that we have the same content. I >>>> think this is the root of the issue that is causing me to raise this >>>> problem to begin with. Switching the name won't resolve it. >>>> >>>> In looking at a community like Forman for example, Greg, the community >>>> manager, runs the demos and coordinates the content updates that you are >>>> describing. I'm wondering why Pulp is doing something different. >>>> >>>> It sounds like you want to deliver all of that content. That is ok with >>>> me if you are also willing to run/coordinate/post the demos. Would that be >>>> a way to solve this? We have docs here [0] about how to do that. Feedback >>>> about this idea would be great. >>>> >>>> [0]: https://pulp.plan.io/projects/pulp/wiki/Sprint_Demo_Notes >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 3:04 PM, Michael Hrivnak <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> I'm happy to change the name of my section to something other than >>>>> "State of Pulp", which isn't very descriptive. I want it to continue >>>>> focusing on what's happening with the technology, such as releases, new >>>>> initiatives getting started (new plugin for example), specific current >>>>> problems (coredump on F26 for example), highlighting areas of >>>>> investigation >>>>> or planning (like when we were wrestling with how to support multi-arch >>>>> container images), deprecations (no more EL6 for example), etc. "Tech >>>>> Update" would be fine, or something similar. >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 2:02 PM, Austin Macdonald <[email protected] >>>>> > wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> +1 to "Release Updates" because it doesn't make an artificial >>>>>> distinction between work done by Red Hat employees and work done by the >>>>>> community. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 10:38 AM, Brian Bouterse <[email protected] >>>>>> > wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> During the sprint demos there are two sections which regularly (if >>>>>>> not always) present redundant content: the State of Pulp update, and the >>>>>>> Community Update. We need to combine or redefine these parts of our >>>>>>> demos >>>>>>> to not be redundant or compete for content to present in each section. >>>>>>> Today the content was 100% redundant to the point where I entirely >>>>>>> skipped >>>>>>> the community update. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Please send ideas or comments. Here are two options I can think of: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Have the State of Pulp be renamed to 'Release Updates' and have that >>>>>>> section talk about releases and any notable issues associated with them. >>>>>>> This is the option I recommend. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Only have a community update and have all content (release updates, >>>>>>> community items, etc) all be delivered through that. I believe this is >>>>>>> how >>>>>>> most projects do it, but I would prefer the option above personally. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -Brian >>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> Pulp-dev mailing list >>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Pulp-dev mailing list >>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> >>>>> Michael Hrivnak >>>>> >>>>> Principal Software Engineer, RHCE >>>>> >>>>> Red Hat >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> Michael Hrivnak >>> >>> Principal Software Engineer, RHCE >>> >>> Red Hat >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pulp-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Pulp-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev > >
_______________________________________________ Pulp-dev mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
