Re: [Openstack] [openstack-community] China & HK OpenStack User Group Meet-up (4-Nov)

[Mark Collier]

Thanks for organizing this meetup! I will be heading over after the board 
meeting along with several other folks. 



Bruce Lok  wrote:

>___
>Community mailing list
>commun...@lists.openstack.org
>http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/community
___
Mailing list: http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
Post to : openstack@lists.openstack.org
Unsubscribe : http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack

Re: [Openstack] Bringing focus to the Operators and Users at the next summit

[Mark Collier]

Tim

I like the idea of starting each design summit session track with a summary
of top pain points by users/operators and a discussion of the relative
priorities.

Perhaps there is some "pre work" for users (including taking the survey) so
that the topics can be grouped for efficient discussion.
On Dec 16, 2013 1:14 PM, "Tim Bell"  wrote:

>
>
> Specifying something as a bug needs to determine things like ‘what
> component should this be addressed in’ and describing the desired
> behaviour. Many of the comments from the survey describe the pain points,
> rather than the solutions. Upgrading is difficult, no mechanism to auto
> restart VMs on other hypervisors, monitoring frameworks, inconsistent
> options in command line tools and APIs, … equally, missing functional gaps
> do not fall well into the bug system.
>
>
>
> I have received the feedback from operators when raising issues that they
> get the response ‘contributions are welcome’. Running an openstack cloud
> can be non-trivial, especially the big ones, and there is a need to
> appreciate that this effort is a significant part of the OpenStack
> community effort (along with the blogs, the documentation updates, the
> summit presentations).
>
>
>
> I personally have a different proposal to Tristan (although I like his)…
> my proposal is that each program should have a session dedicated to
> user/operator needs at the start.  Between the UC, the volunteers to look
> at the survey comments and the user group ambassadors, we should be able to
> put together a set of pain points to be considered for the next release…
> solutions are up to the design teams.
>
>
>
> Tim
>
>
>
> *From:* Joe Gordon [mailto:joe.gord...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* 16 December 2013 18:38
> *To:* Tristan Goode
> *Cc:* openstack@lists.openstack.org
> *Subject:* Re: [Openstack] Bringing focus to the Operators and Users at
> the next summit
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 10:36 PM, Tristan Goode 
> wrote:
>
> I'm trying to establish a feedback loop "because" we (Operators, Users,
> etc)
> need to better present our actual real world, evidence based Operator,
> User,
>
> and even other input like Sales and Marketing experiences back into the
>
> development teams. Much of this does and will come from the great work of
> the UC, the User surveys, and especially the folks that have volunteered to
> analyse the survey results. I'm hoping to build on the survey analysis and
> collaboratively and constructively focus that to present a blueprint or
> roadmap with a "whole of OpenStack" scope. We can dig deeper into the user
> survey feedback and break beyond the bounds of the limited format of the
> user survey to seed the discussion. For me, the most valuable session in
> Hong Kong was the discussion led by Tim of the user survey. It was however,
> all too short.
>
>
>
> Do you have any examples of what kind of feedback you would like to pass
> on to developers (I was unable to attend Tim's discussion of the user
> survey)?  Also just playing devils advocate here, but why not use our bug
> system to provide feedback?
>
>
>
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Sean Dague [mailto:s...@dague.net]
> > Sent: Saturday, 14 December 2013 3:02 AM
> > To: openstack@lists.openstack.org
> > Subject: Re: [Openstack] Bringing focus to the Operators and Users at the
> > next
> > summit
> >
> > So not that I don't think this is a worth while thing, because I think it
> > is. But instead
> > of jumping to the solution of a User Day, it might be useful to figure
> out
> > what's
> > attempting to be solved.
> >
> > Is it?
> >
> > 1) get Users together to share best practices among themselves? Because
> > lots of
> > people have learned things, and want to bootstrap others.
> >
> > 2) get Users and Operators together to share best practices among
> > themselves?
> > Because ...
> >
> > 3) get Vendors and Users and Operators together? Because ...
> >
> > 4) get Developers and Users and Operators together? Because 
> >
> > I think if you start with defining the Because ... part, then the needed
> > parties, then
> > the odds of this being successful and useful to folks goes way up. It
> also
> > would give
> > people attending a reasonable expectation of what they are going to get
> > out of it.
> >
> > Because it would be a shame to set up #1, if most people thought they
> were
> > getting
> > #4 (which is basically what Lorin was proposing with his adopt a
> developer
> > idea),
> > then people being disappointed that they didn't get what they thought
> they
> > were
> > getting.
> >
> > The design summit works pretty well for the development community because
> > of
> > how narrowly it is scoped. So a critical mass in each of those rooms
> knows
> > when it's
> > getting off track and how to pull it back to something actionable at the
> > end.
> >
> >   -Sean
> >
> > On 12/13/2013 06:05 AM, Tristan Goode wrote:
> > > I guess what I'm trying to say by "Users and Operators" covers
> > > ca

Re: [Openstack] Bringing focus to the Operators and Users at the next summit

[Mark Collier]

I love this idea tim.
On Dec 20, 2013 2:00 PM, "Tim Bell"  wrote:

>
> How about we do a mid-summit user/operator boot camp (like the programs
> do, i.e. February or so) where:
>
> - we get some operators and users (i.e. those that run and those that
> consume) OpenStack together
> - we describe our pain points (as Tom would say
> curse/desk-slam/white-board)
> - we prepare a set of blueprints and corresponding representatives to
> explain them to the development community
> - we identify cross-project issues and take them to the TC
>
> My experience is that there is significant overlap between us all so it is
> not necessary to have everyone there, especially if we solicit input before
> through the ambassadors etc.
>
> Tim
>
> On 20 Dec 2013, at 07:55, Tristan Goode  wrote:
>
> > I guess the simplest meaning is "all those that are not committing code
> to
> > the OpenStack code base"? :D
> >
> >
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: Everett Toews [mailto:everett.to...@rackspace.com]
> >> Sent: Wednesday, 18 December 2013 1:54 AM
> >> To: Tristan Goode
> >> Cc: Tom Fifield; 
> >> Subject: Re: [Openstack] Bringing focus to the Operators and Users at
> > the next
> >> summit
> >>
> >> Hi Tristan,
> >>
> >> Can you clarify what you meant by Users in your subject line?
> >>
> >> I took it to mean application developers (i.e. the developers writing
> > applications on
> >> top of OpenStack) and possibly application operators (i.e. the operators
> > deploying
> >> applications on top of OpenStack). They seem to have gotten lost in the
> > discussion
> >> here.
> >>
> >> Ultimately, OpenStack is being built for them. As I believe was your
> > original intent,
> >> they need a voice in such a forum too. I realize that even less
> > application developers
> >> are likely to attend the summit than operators.
> >>
> >> However we still need to encourage their involvement and make a place
> > for them.
> >> We also need to encourage operators to gather feedback from their
> > application
> >> developers about their experiences developer on top of OpenStack as I'm
> > sure the
> >> operations folk get an occasional ear full from them. ;)
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Everett
> >>
> >> P.S. Just to be clear...because we have a lot of overlapping
> > terminology.
> >>
> >> application developers = the developers writing applications on top of
> > OpenStack
> >> application operators = the operators deploying applications on top of
> > OpenStack
> >> [OpenStack] developers = the developers writing OpenStack [OpenStack]
> > operators
> >> = the developers deploying OpenStack
> >>
> >>
> >> On Dec 17, 2013, at 3:24 AM, Tristan Goode wrote:
> >>
> >>> Perfect stated Tom. Thank you.
> >>>
>  -Original Message-
>  From: Tom Fifield [mailto:t...@openstack.org]
>  Sent: Tuesday, 17 December 2013 11:23 AM
>  To: openstack@lists.openstack.org
>  Subject: Re: [Openstack] Bringing focus to the Operators and Users at
> >>> the next
>  summit
> 
>  On 17/12/13 02:55, Tim Bell wrote:
> >
> >
> > Specifying something as a bug needs to determine things like 'what
> > component should this be addressed in' and describing the desired
> > behaviour. Many of the comments from the survey describe the pain
> > points, rather than the solutions. Upgrading is difficult, no
> > mechanism to auto restart VMs on other hypervisors, monitoring
> > frameworks, inconsistent options in command line tools and APIs, .
> > equally, missing functional gaps do not fall well into the bug
> > system.
> >
> >
> >
> > I have received the feedback from operators when raising issues that
> > they get the response 'contributions are welcome'. Running an
> > openstack cloud can be non-trivial, especially the big ones, and
> > there is a need to appreciate that this effort is a significant part
> > of the OpenStack community effort (along with the blogs, the
> > documentation updates, the summit presentations).
> >
> >
> >
> > I personally have a different proposal to Tristan (although I like
> > his). my proposal is that each program should have a session
> > dedicated to user/operator needs at the start.  Between the UC, the
> > volunteers to look at the survey comments and the user group
> > ambassadors, we should be able to put together a set of pain points
> > to be considered for the next release. solutions are up to the
> > design teams.
> 
>  While I think that having such a session in each program fits well
>  with
> >>> "our" (being
>  "the developers'") mentality and/or schedule, I feel that it does not
> >>> suit with that of
>  operators.
> 
>  This is because, as an operator, you typically don't just have
>  problems
> >>> or feedback
>  with one project.
> 
>  Looking through the survey comments, it's likely that if those kind
>  of
> >>> operators were
>  

Re: [Openstack] Bringing focus to the Operators and Users at the next summit

[Mark Collier]

Thanks Sean. You and Thierry have made great points on this thread that I
think give people more insight into the process and timing required to
really impact the releases.

I've fallen into the trap many times of thinking we can solve any problem
in the world during the 10 days a year we are all together, but in the end
its only 10 days. No matter how you organize them, they don't any get
longer.

So +1 for some activities well before the summit to gather input. I think
Tim's suggestion makes a ton of sense.

IMHO we should also avoid the trap of thinking that for gatherings to be
valuable "everyone has to be there". That's what leads back to thinking the
summit weeks are the answer to everything. As Tim said, it's quite likely
operators are experiencing a lot of the same pain points, so what is needed
is critical mass and action, not every known user in one room
(unrealistic). Perhaps with some online components where operators that
couldn't make a meetup can weigh in (and give a weighted priority to a
list?)


On Dec 23, 2013 6:35 AM, "Sean Dague"  wrote:

> On 12/22/2013 12:49 PM, rob_hirschf...@dell.com wrote:
> > I’d like to repeat a suggestion at the Design Summit wrap up – it’s a
> > bit different, so patience…
> >
> >
> >
> > My suggestion was to insert a day “break” into the four day Design
> > Summit for users/operations.  Effectively, we’d have a four day design
> > summit with Monday+Tuesday  - break for user/ops conf –
> > Thursday+Friday.  This would allow the developers and PTLs to join in
> > the conference parts of the summit without needed a distinct event.
> > The regular non-design conference could be held Tuesday-Thursday so
> > there’s a specific overlap day when 100% of the community would be
> together.
> >
> >
> >
> > I felt like this allows ideas from the summit to be socialized with
> > users/operator before we commit to them.  I also felt that it makes the
> > developers more accessible.  Finally, it creates a break/reflection from
> > the intensity of the design.
> >
> >
> >
> > To recap, 4 day design, 3 day user/ops conference spanning 5 days.
>
> Honestly I'd be pretty -1 on that idea. There is a certain momentum that
> builds inside the design summit sessions that 2 hard context switches
> like that would really hurt. If you've ever spent time in the Nova track
> you can see this in spades.
>
> I think one of the missing things for folks that don't spend all their
> time in Design Summit is realizing that DS is really the *middle* of the
> conversation, not that start of one. I actually think this is where
> folks new to design summit tend to flail a little be in their sessions.
> My goals for design summit, and my tracks, were set weeks in advance,
> and there was very little new here, it was mostly about working through
> the sticky details on things we largely were already working on, and
> exposing some of that work to a wider audience which drags in new
> volunteers. So the User / Ops day at Summit is far too late to impact
> that release cycle.
>
> That interaction needs to come 3+ weeks before Design Summit to be
> effective on that cycle. Because if it's later than that, it's just too
> much to digest at a point where the plates are already overflowing. The
> key developers are already about 200% booked at Summits at this point,
> which is actually why *more* OpenStack PTLs spoke at LinuxCon NA this
> year than at OpenStack Summit HK. For instance, I only wandered out side
> of Design Summit twice, when I was on stage. And I didn't even get a
> chance to go to any of the public parties, as I was booked every single
> night at summit - weeks in advance.
>
> So I think that all those folks are pretty open to getting more engaged
> with Users / Ops (I know I am), but the existing Summit structure isn't
> going to allow that. Making people 250% booked at Summit isn't going to
> really be a successful way to handle this.
>
> I'm far more positive on something mid cycle, preferably at other
> conferences that we expected there to be OpenStack folks at to begin with.
>
> -Sean
>
> --
> Sean Dague
> Samsung Research America
> s...@dague.net / sean.da...@samsung.com
> http://dague.net
>
>
> ___
> Mailing list:
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
> Post to : openstack@lists.openstack.org
> Unsubscribe :
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
>
>
___
Mailing list: http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
Post to : openstack@lists.openstack.org
Unsubscribe : http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack

Re: [Openstack] Bringing focus to the Operators and Users at the next summit

[Mark Collier]

Well said Joe.
On Dec 27, 2013 7:37 AM, "Joe Gordon"  wrote:

>
> On Dec 27, 2013 4:24 AM, "Tristan Goode"  wrote:
> >
> > I'm having trouble seeing these great points of insight here other than
> it seems to indicate that the design summit format could be improved.
> Distilling this down to "We developers are all too busy at the summit, why
> don’t you users go get your own thing" suggests that perhaps it's time for
> a review of the summit format.
> >
>
> I think that's missing a key point, there is much more to this then
> evaluating the summit format. The summit is the middle of a long
> development dialog not the beginning or the end. Getting more operator
> feedback to the developers shouldn't just happen at the summits, it should
> be a continuous process just like openstack planning and development. So we
> need some way for operators and developers to have a continuous dialog.
> Developers communicate today on: IRC, email and launchpad and lastly in
> person twice a year at the design summit.
>
> >
> >
> > After all it does say "users" and "developers" on the summit logo.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > From: Mark Collier [mailto:m...@collierclan.net]
> > Sent: Tuesday, 24 December 2013 12:30 AM
> > To: Sean Dague
> >
> > Cc: openstack@lists.openstack.org
> > Subject: Re: [Openstack] Bringing focus to the Operators and Users at
> the next summit
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks Sean. You and Thierry have made great points on this thread that
> I think give people more insight into the process and timing required to
> really impact the releases.
> >
> > I've fallen into the trap many times of thinking we can solve any
> problem in the world during the 10 days a year we are all together, but in
> the end its only 10 days. No matter how you organize them, they don't any
> get longer.
> >
> > So +1 for some activities well before the summit to gather input. I
> think Tim's suggestion makes a ton of sense.
> >
> > IMHO we should also avoid the trap of thinking that for gatherings to be
> valuable "everyone has to be there". That's what leads back to thinking the
> summit weeks are the answer to everything. As Tim said, it's quite likely
> operators are experiencing a lot of the same pain points, so what is needed
> is critical mass and action, not every known user in one room
> (unrealistic). Perhaps with some online components where operators that
> couldn't make a meetup can weigh in (and give a weighted priority to a
> list?)
> >
> > On Dec 23, 2013 6:35 AM, "Sean Dague"  wrote:
> >>
> >> On 12/22/2013 12:49 PM, rob_hirschf...@dell.com wrote:
> >> > I’d like to repeat a suggestion at the Design Summit wrap up – it’s a
> >> > bit different, so patience…
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > My suggestion was to insert a day “break” into the four day Design
> >> > Summit for users/operations.  Effectively, we’d have a four day design
> >> > summit with Monday+Tuesday  - break for user/ops conf –
> >> > Thursday+Friday.  This would allow the developers and PTLs to join in
> >> > the conference parts of the summit without needed a distinct event.
> >> > The regular non-design conference could be held Tuesday-Thursday so
> >> > there’s a specific overlap day when 100% of the community would be
> together.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > I felt like this allows ideas from the summit to be socialized with
> >> > users/operator before we commit to them.  I also felt that it makes
> the
> >> > developers more accessible.  Finally, it creates a break/reflection
> from
> >> > the intensity of the design.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > To recap, 4 day design, 3 day user/ops conference spanning 5 days.
> >>
> >> Honestly I'd be pretty -1 on that idea. There is a certain momentum that
> >> builds inside the design summit sessions that 2 hard context switches
> >> like that would really hurt. If you've ever spent time in the Nova track
> >> you can see this in spades.
> >>
> >> I think one of the missing things for folks that don't spend all their
> >> time in Design Summit is realizing that DS is really the *middle* of the
> >> conversation, not that start of one. I actually think this is where
> >> folks new to design summit tend to flail a lit

Re: [Openstack] Formulate application developer oriented questions for the user survey

[Mark Collier]

Thanks for bringing up the opportunity to expand the survey to gather
feedback from end-users (of the API...) Everett.

I think this is a great idea, and I was also thinking that as we make
progress on the interop efforts with things like DefCore[1][2][3] (and
RefStack) that Rob Hirshfeld & others are leading, it's critical that we
get input from this class of "user".  For example, it would be ideal IMHO
to identify which APIs (and underlying functions) are most valued, to
inform the list of tests included and ultimately the ones that "must pass".


Today there is an optional component in the survey for "deployment" which
obviously fits the operator class of "user", so perhaps there is a similar
path with more detailed question for the devs targeting the APIs (i.e.
deploying apps on openstack clouds, for lack of a better phrase) that
includes some kind of feedback mechanism for individual APIs (don't care
/nice to have/ must have) as well as related issues like api
discoverability.

[1] http://robhirschfeld.com/category/clouds/openstack/defcore/
[2] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/DefCoreCommittee
[3] http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/defcore-committee


On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 2:09 PM, Everett Toews
wrote:

> On Jan 17, 2014, at 5:45 AM, Gregor von Laszewski wrote:
>
> > Everett:
> >
> > you may want to add a question such as
> >
> >   * “Why did you use this  library?”
>
> That's a good point. One of the things that concerns me about how the
> questions are worded right now is that they are very reactionary. That's
> great for finding out the current state of thing but does nothing to inform
> us on where users want to go in the future and how we can help them get
> there.
>
> They're more "What are you using right now?" not "What will you need in
> the future?"
>
> Asking why will also help reveal requirements. Personally I need to think
> on this a bit more and take another crack at the questions later.
>
> > This may give an additional insight and possibly motivation for further
> actions/development. Some examples
> >
> > a) in Python the use of libcloud via the EC2 is popular. Why?:
> compatibility
> >
> > b) in the  cloudmesh project we developed our own compatibility library
> that makes use of the native openstack protocol instead of using lib
> cloud/EC2 to access openstack. Why: (1) libcloud/EC2 has limited
> functionality, (2) debugging of production clouds with native protocols
> (starting thousands of vms), (3) easier integration into user interfaces
> while leveraging JSON. (4) Together this allows us to have an API that
> accesses and manages VMS on AWS, Azure, and Openstack the same way but uses
> in case of Openstack the native protocol instead of lib cloud/EC2.
>
> Just out of curiosity, why didn't you contribute to the libcloud project
> to fill in the missing functionality rather than start your own?
>
> Thanks,
> Everett
>
>
> ___
> Mailing list:
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
> Post to : openstack@lists.openstack.org
> Unsubscribe :
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
>
___
Mailing list: http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
Post to : openstack@lists.openstack.org
Unsubscribe : http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack

Re: [Openstack] [User-committee] Formulate application developer oriented questions for the user survey

[Mark Collier]

IMHO it's useful for prioritizing potential plug ins / toolkits for "cloud
app" developers based on their preferred tools.

An example from the AWS world would be: http://aws.amazon.com/eclipse/





On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 1:37 PM, Sean Dague  wrote:

> Out of curiosity, why is the development environment question an
> interesting one? Is there some decision or action that an OpenStack
> program or project would make based on that info?
>
> It is really easy to ask lots of questions, however, every additional
> question causes a drop of in percentage responders. So every question
> should have a clear reason for being asked other than general interest.
>
> And on a lighter note... how did vim make the list but not emacs? ;)
>
> -Sean
>
> On 02/05/2014 02:50 AM, Martin, JC wrote:
> > For the development environment, more precisely, it may be PyCharm
> instead of intelliJ. or to cover both : jetbrain IDEA.
> >
> >
> > On Feb 3, 2014, at 2:42 PM, Everett Toews 
> wrote:
> >
> >> Some more potential questions.
> >>
> >> 1. What development environment do you use?
> >> [ ] Eclipse
> >> [ ] Intellij IDEA
> >> [ ] Visual Studio
> >> [ ] Sublime
> >> [ ] vim
> >> Other
> >>
> >> 2. What tools are you using to deploy/configure your application?
> >> [ ] Ansible
> >> [ ] Chef
> >> [ ] Puppet
> >> [ ] SaltStack
> >> Other
> >>
> >> 3. What do you struggle with when developing and deploying applications
> on OpenStack?
> >> Free form answers.
> >>
> >> I'll try to aggregate all of the Q&A into one list this week.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Everett
> >>
> >>
> >> On Jan 21, 2014, at 11:55 AM, Everett Toews <
> everett.to...@rackspace.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Jan 21, 2014, at 10:29 AM, Dave Neary wrote:
> >>>
>  On 01/21/2014 02:25 AM, Everett Toews wrote:
> > There are a number of issues that stand out to me but before getting
> > into them some quick definitions to be clear what I'm talking about.
> >
> > OpenStack developer = developer working on OpenStack itself
> > OpenStack operator = operator deploying/maintaining an OpenStack
> cloud
> > application developer = developer working on application being
> deployed
> > on an OpenStack cloud
> > application operator = operator deploying/maintaining an application
> on
> > an OpenStack cloud
> > users = any of OpenStack operator, application developer, application
> > operator
> 
>  It would be really useful, I think, to match these up with some of the
>  personas we have, so that we are all talking about the same thing
>  (there's a big difference between someone deploying a small private
>  cloud and someone operating a large public cloud, for example).
> >>>
> >>> I attended your session on personas at the HK Summit. I was the guy
> ranting about SDKs from the back. ;)
> >>>
> >>> The personas are definitely useful and I think we could use them to
> help inform the definitions of the above. Here's what I'm starting to
> envision for the survey.
> >>>
> >>> On the About You page [1] we update the What best describes your
> involvement with OpenStack? section as follows
> >>>
> >>> [ ] OpenStack cloud service provider - provides public or hosted
> private cloud services for other organizations
> >>> [ ] Ecosystem vendor - provides software or solutions that enable
> others to build or run OpenStack clouds
> >>> [ ] Private cloud operator - runs an OpenStack private cloud for their
> own organization
> >>> [ ] Application developer - has API or dashboard credentials and
> deploys/maintains an application running on an OpenStack cloud
> >>> [ ] Application operator - has API or dashboard credentials and
> develops an application running on an OpenStack cloud
> >>>
> >>> If the survey taker checks Application developer or Application
> operator then they are shown a survey page with the questions we are
> formulating here instead of/in addition to the About Your OpenStack
> Deployments page.
> >>>
> >>> I don't think we want to have the role definitions above too long but
> anything can help.
> >>>
> >>> Can you link us to the personas work and how they might map to the
> roles as above?
> >>>
> >>> [sidebar]
> >>> It seems the About You page already makes the distinction between
> someone deploying a small private cloud and someone operating a large
> public cloud. However, I think the line between "...or hosted private cloud
> services for other organizations" and "runs an OpenStack private cloud for
> their own organization" is pretty thin. "hosted private cloud services for
> other organizations" sounds like a small-scale public cloud to me. The real
> distinction being whether you're doing it for your org or for others. The
> questions on the About Your OpenStack Deployments page make the distinction
> between scale.
> >>>
> >>> They could be reworded as
> >>>
> >>> [ ] OpenStack operator for a public cloud - provides public or hosted
> private cloud services for other organizations
> >>> [ ] O

Re: [Openstack] Support the Ada Initiative: A Challenge to the OpenStack Communtiy

[Mark Collier]

Thanks for your leadership! 



> On Oct 6, 2014, at 3:44 PM, Mike Perez  wrote:
> 
> You're all awesome, as the goal has already been met! The matching challenge 
> has just been raised to $16,384!
> 
> https://supportada.org?campaign=openstack
> 
> Status: https://adainitiative.org/counters/2014counter-openstack.svg
> 
> --
> Mike Perez
> 
>> On Oct 6, 2014, at 11:33, Mike Perez  wrote:
>> 
>> Some of you may already be aware of Sage Weil’s challenge to the open source
>> storage community to raise the level of female participation in open source 
>> by
>> contributing to the Ada Initiative [1]. I would also like to share about the
>> Ada Initiative, and how they are helping open source communities like
>> OpenStack. I’m also going to increase Sage’s original matching to $10,000 and
>> extend a personal challenge [2] to the OpenStack community. If you already 
>> know
>> about the Ada Initiative, you can donate now:
>> 
>> https://supportada.org?campaign=openstack
>> 
>> The current status of the campaign can be found here:
>> https://adainitiative.org/counters/2014counter-openstack.svg
>> 
>> The Ada Initiative has helped over two million women get and stay involved 
>> with
>> open source communities. The organization helps communities understand
>> a culture that needs to exist in order to successfully achieve diversity. 
>> While
>> women make up about 30% of the software developer community, they only 
>> account
>> for less than 10% of the open source community.
>> 
>> On a personal level this is something that I have been actively committed to
>> doing and I have had the wonderful opportunity to volunteer as a mentor at
>> a couple of groups that are bringing diversity to the tech community. The
>> PyLadies San Francisco group is providing exciting workshops [3] that will 
>> give
>> a foundation to women to expand on. The Women Who Code group is preparing 
>> women
>> for internship opportunities through the Gnome Outreach Program for Women in
>> open source projects like OpenStack [4]. It's these experiences that led me 
>> to
>> explore how the OpenStack community promotes diversity.
>> 
>> Today the OpenStack community has been including a Code of Conduct [5] in an
>> attempt to provide a safe, no harassment environment at our summits. We have
>> events [6] that bring women together to talk about their achievements, to get
>> others excited on what can be contributed to the community. Our participation
>> in the Gnome Outreach Program for Women continues to grow with mentors eager 
>> to
>> bring out the talent of our selected interns [7].  Things are getting better
>> but we have a long way to go.  The Atlanta design summit had attendance of 9%
>> women, up from 7% at the previous Hong Kong summit.  But this number is still
>> unacceptable, and as others have echoed in the community, we must work to 
>> make
>> it better.
>> 
>> This is a change I want the OpenStack community to be part of. I would like 
>> to
>> kick start things with the community with a challenge for us to raise $10,000
>> before Wednesday, Oct 8th, to which Sage and I will match that dollar for
>> dollar!
>> 
>> https://supportada.org?campaign=openstack
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Mike Perez
>> 
>> [1] - 
>> http://ceph.com/community/support-ada-initiative-challenge-open-storage-community
>> [2] - 
>> https://www.dreamhost.com/dreamscape/2014/10/06/support-the-ada-initiative-a-challenge-to-the-openstack-community/
>> [3] - http://www.meetup.com/PyLadiesSF/events/201387112/
>> [4] - http://www.meetup.com/Women-Who-Code-SF/events/195850392/
>> [5] - 
>> https://www.openstack.org/summit/openstack-paris-summit-2014/code-of-conduct/
>> [6] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jkzyNbvl_5g
>> [7] - https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/OutreachProgramForWomen
> ___
> Mailing list: http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
> Post to : openstack@lists.openstack.org
> Unsubscribe : http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
___
Mailing list: http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
Post to : openstack@lists.openstack.org
Unsubscribe : http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack

Re: [Openstack] tracking approved specs via RSS

[Mark Collier]

This is great Doug, thanks!





> On Nov 13, 2014, at 5:14 PM, Doug Hellmann  wrote:
> 
> We’ve added RSS feeds to most of the published specs on 
> http://specs.openstack.org to make it easier to follow along with approved 
> specs. Watching gerrit is still the best way to track proposals and reviews, 
> but for the folks who are interested in the sausage but don’t want to know 
> how it’s made, having an RSS feed is another way for them to keep up.
> 
> Enjoy,
> Doug
> 
> 
> ___
> Mailing list: http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
> Post to : openstack@lists.openstack.org
> Unsubscribe : http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack

___
Mailing list: http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
Post to : openstack@lists.openstack.org
Unsubscribe : http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack

Re: [Openstack] Call for Speakers - February 9 Deadline!

[Mark collier]

Voting has not started but will in the next few days. 




> On Feb 13, 2015, at 6:02 AM, vishal yadav  wrote:
> 
> Hi Stefano,
> 
> Please let me know if voting for submitted tracks/presentation has been 
> started. What is the URL which can be checked for submitted entries for 
> community voting?
> 
> Thanks,
> Vishal
> 
>> On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 1:58 PM, Stefano Maffulli  
>> wrote:
>> February 9th is the deadline to submit a talk for the May 2015 Vancouver
>> Summit
>> 
>> Would you like to speak at the May 2015 OpenStack Summit in Vancouver?
>> 
>> Then hurry up and submit a talk! February 9 is the final day that
>> speaking submissions will be accepted.
>> 
>> https://www.openstack.org/summit/vancouver-2015/call-for-speakers/
>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> Mailing list: http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
>> Post to : openstack@lists.openstack.org
>> Unsubscribe : http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
> 
> ___
> Mailing list: http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
> Post to : openstack@lists.openstack.org
> Unsubscribe : http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
___
Mailing list: http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
Post to : openstack@lists.openstack.org
Unsubscribe : http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack

Re: [Openstack] Call for Speakers - February 9 Deadline!

[Mark Collier]

Update:

Session voting is now open for the May 2015 OpenStack Vancouver Summit.

*VOTE HERE <http://www.openstack.org/vote-vancouver>.*

Hurry, voting closes at 5pm  CT on Monday,
February 23. 

Continue to visit openstack.org/summit for all Summit-related information,
including registration, visa letters, hotels and FAQ.



On Friday, February 13, 2015, Mark collier  wrote:

> Voting has not started but will in the next few days.
>
>
>
>
> On Feb 13, 2015, at 6:02 AM, vishal yadav  > wrote:
>
> Hi Stefano,
>
> Please let me know if voting for submitted tracks/presentation has been
> started. What is the URL which can be checked for submitted entries for
> community voting?
>
> Thanks,
> Vishal
>
> On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 1:58 PM, Stefano Maffulli  > wrote:
>
>> February 9th is the deadline to submit a talk for the May 2015 Vancouver
>> Summit
>>
>> Would you like to speak at the May 2015 OpenStack Summit in Vancouver?
>>
>> Then hurry up and submit a talk! February 9 is the final day that
>> speaking submissions will be accepted.
>>
>> https://www.openstack.org/summit/vancouver-2015/call-for-speakers/
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Mailing list:
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
>> Post to : openstack@lists.openstack.org
>> 
>> Unsubscribe :
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
>>
>
> ___
> Mailing list:
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
> Post to : openstack@lists.openstack.org
> 
> Unsubscribe :
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
>
>
___
Mailing list: http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
Post to : openstack@lists.openstack.org
Unsubscribe : http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack

Re: [Openstack] (no subject)

[Mark collier]

If you are attempting to sign in to vote on summit sessions, please email 
sum...@openstack.org with the details. That will open a support ticket, and our 
summit team will follow up. 




> On Feb 21, 2015, at 11:55 PM, Israel Koffman  wrote:
> 
>  
> I still can't sign in to the Openstack  website with my email and password, 
> please check !
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> Best Regards,
> 
>  
> 
> Israel Koffman
> 
> CEO
> 
> Runcom Technologies. Ltd.
> 
> Direct Phone:+972-3-9428874
> 
> Office Phone:+972-3-942
> 
> Mobile Phone:+972-545-303110
> 
> USA Mobile Phone: 1-646-530-1502
> 
> Skype: Israel.Koffman
> 
> FAX:+972-3-9528805
> 
> Websites: www.runcom.com and 
> http://rf-mw.org/multiple_access_method_ofdma.html
>  
>  Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail. Thank you.
>  
> ___
> Mailing list: http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
> Post to : openstack@lists.openstack.org
> Unsubscribe : http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
___
Mailing list: http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
Post to : openstack@lists.openstack.org
Unsubscribe : http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack

[Openstack] Last chance Vancouver Summit Early Birds!

[Mark Collier]

Hey Stackers,

You’ve got TWO DAYS left to snag an early bird ticket, which is $699 for a full 
access, week-long pass. That’s four days of 300+ sessions and workshops on 
OpenStack, containers, edge, CI/CD and HPC/GPU/AI in Vancouver May 21-24th.

The OpenStack Summit is my favorite place to meet and learn from smart, driven, 
funny people from all over the world. Will you join me in Vancouver May 21-24? 
OpenStack.org/summit  has the details.

Who else will you meet in Vancouver? 

- An OpenStack developer to discuss the future of the software?
- A Kubernetes expert in one of more than 60 sessions about Kubernetes?
- A Foundation member who can help you learn how to contribute code upstream at 
the Upstream Institute?
- Other enterprises & service providers running OpenStack at scale like 
JPMorgan Chase, Progressive Insurance, Google, Target, Walmart, Yahoo!, China 
Mobile, AT&T, Verizon, China Railway, and Yahoo! Japan?
- Your next employee… or employer?

Key links:
Register: openstack.org/summit  (Early bird 
pricing ends April 4 at 11:59pm Pacific Time / April 5 6:59 UTC)
Full Schedule: 
https://www.openstack.org/summit/vancouver-2018/summit-schedule/#day=2018-05-21 

Hotel Discounts: https://www.openstack.org/summit/vancouver-2018/travel/ 

Sponsor: https://www.openstack.org/summit/vancouver-2018/sponsors/ 

Code of Conduct: 
https://www.openstack.org/summit/vancouver-2018/code-of-conduct/ 


See you at the Summit!

Mark
twitter.com/sparkycollier ___
Mailing list: http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
Post to : openstack@lists.openstack.org
Unsubscribe : http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack