[openstack-dev] [all] Stepping down from Release Management team
Hi all, I have had a fantastic time getting to work on the Release Management team and getting to know you all through the release marketing work, however, it is time for me to step down from my role on the Release Management team as I am moving on from my role at the Foundation and will no longer be working on upstream OpenStack. I cannot thank you all enough for how you all welcomed me into the OpenStack community and for how much I have learned about open source development in my time here. If you have questions about cycle-highlights, swing by #openstack-release. If you have questions about release marketing, contact lau...@openstack.org. For other inquiries, contact alli...@openstack.org. While I won't be working upstream anymore, I'll only be a Tweet or IRC message away. Thank you again, and remember that cycle-highlights should be submitted by RC1. Best, Anne Bertucio irc: annabelleB twitter: @whyhiannabelle Anne Bertucio OpenStack Foundation a...@openstack.org | irc: annabelleB __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [election][tc]Question for candidates about global reachout
> I though I remember someone (annabelleB?) saying there were known issues > (technical or otherwise) regarding the official channels spun up by the > Foundation. Two separate issues that perhaps got mashed together :) Unofficial WeChat channels are limited to ~500 participants and are invite-only. That makes a few challenges for a community of our size (much more than 500!). Official subscription channels don’t have these limitations, but there’s a lengthy process to get one. It’s currently in progress (unfortunately I don’t think we have an ETA beyond “in progress” at this point—more than one month; less than six months?). Anne Bertucio OpenStack Foundation a...@openstack.org | irc: annabelleB > On Sep 17, 2018, at 2:56 PM, Lance Bragstad wrote: > > > > On Mon, Sep 17, 2018 at 1:42 PM Mohammed Naser <mailto:mna...@vexxhost.com>> wrote: > Hi, > > On that note, is there any way to get an 'invite' onto those channels? > > Any information about the foundation side of things about the > 'official' channels? > > I actually have a question about this as well. During the TC discussion last > Friday there was representation from the Foundation in the room. I though I > remember someone (annabelleB?) saying there were known issues (technical or > otherwise) regarding the official channels spun up by the Foundation. > > Does anyone know what issues were being referred to here? > > > Thanks, > Mohammed > On Mon, Sep 17, 2018 at 3:28 PM Samuel Cassiba <mailto:sam...@cassi.ba>> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Sep 17, 2018 at 6:58 AM Sylvain Bauza > <mailto:sylvain.ba...@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Le lun. 17 sept. 2018 à 15:32, Jeremy Stanley > > <mailto:fu...@yuggoth.org>> a écrit : > > >> > > >> On 2018-09-16 14:14:41 +0200 (+0200), Jean-philippe Evrard wrote: > > >> [...] > > >> > - What is the problem joining Wechat will solve (keeping in mind the > > >> > language barrier)? > > >> > > >> As I understand it, the suggestion is that mere presence of project > > >> leadership in venues where this emerging subset of our community > > >> gathers would provide a strong signal that we support them and care > > >> about their experience with the software. > > >> > > >> > - Isn't this problem already solved for other languages with > > >> > existing initiatives like local ambassadors and i18n team? Why > > >> > aren't these relevant? > > >> [...] > > >> > > >> It seems like there are at least couple of factors at play here: > > >> first the significant number of users and contributors within > > >> mainland China compared to other regions (analysis suggests there > > >> were nearly as many contributors to the Rocky release from China as > > >> the USA), but second there may be facets of Chinese culture which > > >> make this sort of demonstrative presence a much stronger signal than > > >> it would be in other cultures. > > >> > > >> > - Pardon my ignorance here, what is the problem with email? (I > > >> > understand some chat systems might be blocked, I thought emails > > >> > would be fine, and the lowest common denominator). > > >> > > >> Someone in the TC room (forgive me, I don't recall who now, maybe > > >> Rico?) asserted that Chinese contributors generally only read the > > >> first message in any given thread (perhaps just looking for possible > > >> announcements?) and that if they _do_ attempt to read through some > > >> of the longer threads they don't participate in them because the > > >> discussion is presumed to be over and decisions final by the time > > >> they "reach the end" (I guess not realizing that it's perfectly fine > > >> to reply to a month-old discussion and try to help alter course on > > >> things if you have an actual concern?). > > >> > > > > > > While I understand the technical issues that could be due using IRC in > > > China, I still don't get why opening the gates and saying WeChat being > > > yet another official channel would prevent our community from fragmenting. > > > > > > Truly the usage of IRC is certainly questionable, but if we have multiple > > > ways to discuss, I just doubt we could prevent us to silo ourselves > > > between our personal usages. > > > Either we consider the new channels as bein
[openstack-dev] Aug 30, 1500 UTC: Community Meeting: Come learn what's new in Rocky!
A reminder that there’ll be a community meeting tomorrow August 30, at 1500UTC/8am Pacific, where you can learn about some of the new things in OpenStack Rocky, and get updates on the pilot projects Airship, Kata Containers, StarlingX, and Zuul. We’ll hear from PTLs (Julia Kreger, Ironic; Alex Schultz, TripleO) on what’s new in their projects, as well as pilot project technical contributors Eric Ernst (Kata), Bruce Jones (StarlingX), and OSF staff + contributors Chris Hoge (Airship) and Jeremy Stanley (Zuul). You can join using the webinar info below, but this session will be recorded if you can’t make it live! Learn what's new in the Rocky release, and get updates on Airship, Kata Containers, StarlingX, and Zuul. — When: Aug 30, 2018 8:00 AM Pacific Time (US and Canada) Topic: OpenStack Community Meeting Please click the link below to join the webinar: https://zoom.us/j/551803657 <https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Fzoom.us%2Fj%2F551803657=D=1535838225116000=AFQjCNE4BP7cAUzw6HiY8UFvdHIChgPO0A> Or iPhone one-tap : US: +16699006833,,551803657# or +16468769923,,551803657# Or Telephone: Dial(for higher quality, dial a number based on your current location): US: +1 669 900 6833 or +1 646 876 9923 Webinar ID: 551 803 657 International numbers available: https://zoom.us/u/bh2jVweqf <https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Fzoom.us%2Fu%2Fbh2jVweqf=D=1535838225117000=AFQjCNEpPfId9Sv1bDcy5LsgPPz_iope-A> Anne Bertucio OpenStack Foundation a...@openstack.org | irc: annabelleB __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
[openstack-dev] [community][Rocky] Community Meeting: Rocky + project updates
Hi all, Updated meeting information below for the OpenStack Community Meeting on August 30 at 3pm UTC. We’ll cover what’s new in the Rocky release, hear updates from the Airship, Kata Containers, StarlingX and Zuul projects, and get a preview of the Berlin Summit. Hope you can join us, but if not, it will be recorded! When: Aug 30, 2018 8:00 AM Pacific Time (US and Canada) Topic: OpenStack Community Meeting Please click the link below to join the webinar: https://zoom.us/j/551803657 Or iPhone one-tap : US: +16699006833,,551803657# or +16468769923,,551803657# Or Telephone: Dial(for higher quality, dial a number based on your current location): US: +1 669 900 6833 or +1 646 876 9923 Webinar ID: 551 803 657 International numbers available: https://zoom.us/u/bh2jVweqf Cheers, Anne Bertucio OpenStack Foundation a...@openstack.org | irc: annabelleB > On Aug 16, 2018, at 9:46 AM, Anne Bertucio wrote: > > Hi all, > > Save the date for an OpenStack community meeting on August 30 at 3pm UTC. > This is the evolution of the “Marketing Community Release Preview” meeting > that we’ve had each cycle. While that meeting has always been open to all, we > wanted to expand the topics and encourage anyone who was interested in > getting updates on the Rocky release or the newer projects at OSF to attend. > > We’ll cover: > —What’s new in Rocky > (This info will still be at a fairly high level, so might not be new > information if you’re someone who stays up to date in the dev ML or is > actively involved in upstream work) > > —Updates from Airship, Kata Containers, StarlingX, and Zuul > > —What you can expect at the Berlin Summit in November > > This meeting will be run over Zoom (look for info closer to the 30th) and > will be recorded, so if you can’t make the time, don’t panic! > > Cheers, > Anne Bertucio > OpenStack Foundation > a...@openstack.org <mailto:a...@openstack.org> | irc: annabelleB > > > > > > ___ > Marketing mailing list > market...@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/marketing __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
[openstack-dev] [community][Rocky] Save the Date: Community Meeting: Rocky + project updates
Hi all, Save the date for an OpenStack community meeting on August 30 at 3pm UTC. This is the evolution of the “Marketing Community Release Preview” meeting that we’ve had each cycle. While that meeting has always been open to all, we wanted to expand the topics and encourage anyone who was interested in getting updates on the Rocky release or the newer projects at OSF to attend. We’ll cover: —What’s new in Rocky (This info will still be at a fairly high level, so might not be new information if you’re someone who stays up to date in the dev ML or is actively involved in upstream work) —Updates from Airship, Kata Containers, StarlingX, and Zuul —What you can expect at the Berlin Summit in November This meeting will be run over Zoom (look for info closer to the 30th) and will be recorded, so if you can’t make the time, don’t panic! Cheers, Anne Bertucio OpenStack Foundation a...@openstack.org | irc: annabelleB __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [TC] [Infra] Terms of service for hosted projects
> Either way, I would like to ensure that someone from > Kata is communicating with qemu upstream. Since probably not too many Kata folks are on the OpenStack dev list (something to tackle in another thread or OSF all-project meeting), chiming in to say yup!, we’ve got QEMU upstream folks in the Kata community, and we’re definitely committed to making sure we communicate with other communities about these things (be it QEMU or another group in the future). Anne Bertucio OpenStack Foundation a...@openstack.org | irc: annabelleB > On Jun 6, 2018, at 12:16 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote: > > Excerpts from Zane Bitter's message of 2018-06-06 14:52:04 -0400: >> On 29/05/18 13:37, Jeremy Stanley wrote: >>> On 2018-05-29 10:53:03 -0400 (-0400), Zane Bitter wrote: >>>> We allow various open source projects that are not an official >>>> part of OpenStack or necessarily used by OpenStack to be hosted on >>>> OpenStack infrastructure - previously under the 'StackForge' >>>> branding, but now without separate branding. Do we document >>>> anywhere the terms of service under which we offer such hosting? >>> >>> We do so minimally here: >>> >>> https://docs.openstack.org/infra/system-config/unofficial_project_hosting.html >>> >>> It's linked from this section of the Project Creator’s Guide in the >>> Infra Manual: >>> >>> https://docs.openstack.org/infra/manual/creators.html#decide-status-of-your-project >>> >>> But yes, we should probably add some clarity to that document and >>> see about making sure it's linked more prominently. We also maintain >>> some guidelines for reviewers of changes to the >>> openstack-infra/project-config repository, which has a bit to say >>> about new repository creation changes: >>> >>> https://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack-infra/project-config/tree/REVIEWING.rst >>> >>>> It is my understanding that the infra team will enforce the >>>> following conditions when a repo import request is received: >>>> >>>> * The repo must be licensed under an OSI-approved open source >>>> license. >>> >>> That has been our custom, but we should add a statement to this >>> effect in the aforementioned document. >>> >>>> * If the repo is a fork of another project, there must be (public) >>>> evidence of an attempt to co-ordinate with the upstream first. >>> >>> I don't recall this ever being mandated, though the project-config >>> reviewers do often provide suggestions to project creators such as >>> places in the existing community with which they might consider >>> cooperating/collaborating. >> >> We're mandating it for StarlingX, aren't we? > > We suggested that it would make importing the repositories more > palatable, and Dean said he would do it. Which isn't quite the same > as making it a requirement. > >> >> AIUI we haven't otherwise forked anything that was still maintained >> (although we've forked plenty of libraries after establishing that the >> upstream was moribund). > > Kata has a fork of the kernel, but that feels less controversial > because the kernel community expects forks as part of their contribution > process. > > Kata also has a qemu fork, but that is under the kata-containers > github org and not our infrastructure. I'm not sure someone outside > of our community would differentiate between the two, but maybe > they would. Either way, I would like to ensure that someone from > Kata is communicating with qemu upstream. > >> >>>> Neither of those appears to be documented (specifically, >>>> https://governance.openstack.org/tc/reference/licensing.html only >>>> specifies licensing requirements for official projects, libraries >>>> imported by official projects, and software used by the Infra >>>> team). >>> >>> The Infrastructure team has been granted a fair amount of autonomy >>> to determine its operating guidelines, and future plans to separate >>> project hosting further from the OpenStack name (in an attempt to >>> make it more clear that hosting your project in the infrastructure >>> is not an endorsement by OpenStack and doesn't make it "part of >>> OpenStack") make the OpenStack TC governance site a particularly >>> poor choice of venue to document such things. >> >> So clearly in the future this will be the responsibility of the >> Winterscale Infrastructure Council assuming that pro
Re: [openstack-dev] [release] Collecting Queens demos
Hi Kaz, Format is your choice, but we weren’t planning to host demos, just aggregate the links in a single place for readers, so you’ll want to upload to youtube/vimeo/etc and then send. Cheers, Anne Bertucio Marketing and Certification, OpenStack Foundation a...@openstack.org | 206-992-7961 > On Feb 15, 2018, at 8:03 PM, Kaz Shinohara <ksnhr.t...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Anne, > > > I'm wondering if I can send a demo video for heat-dashboard which is a > new feature in Queens. > Is there any format of the video ? > > Regards, > Kaz > > > 2018-02-16 8:09 GMT+09:00 Anne Bertucio <a...@openstack.org>: >> Hi all, >> >> We’re getting the Queens Release communications ready, and I’ve seen a >> handful of video demos and tutorials of new Queens features. We’d like to >> compile a list of these to share with the marketing community. If you have a >> demo, would you please send a link my way so we can make sure to include it? >> >> If you don’t have a demo and have the time, I’d encourage you to make one of >> a feature you’re really excited about! We’ve heard really positive feedback >> about what’s already out there; people love them! >> >> >> Cheers, >> Anne Bertucio >> OpenStack Foundation >> a...@openstack.org | 206-992-7961 >> >> >> >> >> >> __ >> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) >> Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >> > > __ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
[openstack-dev] [release] Collecting Queens demos
Hi all, We’re getting the Queens Release communications ready, and I’ve seen a handful of video demos and tutorials of new Queens features. We’d like to compile a list of these to share with the marketing community. If you have a demo, would you please send a link my way so we can make sure to include it? If you don’t have a demo and have the time, I’d encourage you to make one of a feature you’re really excited about! We’ve heard really positive feedback about what’s already out there; people love them! Cheers, Anne Bertucio OpenStack Foundation a...@openstack.org | 206-992-7961 __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [release][PTL] Cycle highlights reminder
Hi all, With Queens-3 behind us and RC1 coming up, wanted to give a gentle reminder about the cycle-highlights. To get the party started, I added an example highlight for Cinder, Horizon, Ironic and Nova (modify as necessary!): https://review.openstack.org/#/c/540171/ <https://review.openstack.org/#/c/540171/> Hopefully this is a fairly painless process that comes with the great reward of not answering “What changed in this release?” five times over to various marketing and press arms. I’m definitely looking to refine how we handle release communications, so come find me in Dublin with all your feedback and suggestions! Cheers, Anne Bertucio OpenStack Foundation a...@openstack.org | 206-992-7961 > On Dec 22, 2017, at 1:06 AM, Thierry Carrez <thie...@openstack.org> wrote: > > Matt Riedemann wrote: >> On 12/14/2017 2:24 PM, Sean McGinnis wrote: >>> Hey all, >>> >>> As we get closer to Queens-3 and our final RCs, I wanted to remind >>> everyone >>> about the new 'cycle-highlights' we have added to our deliverable info. >>> >>> Background >>> -- >>> >>> As a reminder on the background, we were finding that a lot of PTLs were >>> getting pings several times at the end of every release cycle by >>> various folks >>> asking for highlights of what was new and what significant changes >>> were coming >>> in the new release. It was often the same answer to journalists, product >>> managers, and others that needed to compile that info. >>> >>> To try to mitigate that somewhat, we've built in the ability to >>> capture these >>> highlights as part of the release. It get compiled and published to >>> the web >>> site so we have one place to point these folks to. It is intended as a >>> place >>> where they can get the basic info they need, not as a complete marketing >>> message. >>> >>> As you prepare for upcoming releases, please start to consider what >>> you might >>> want to show up in this collection. We ideally want just a few >>> highlights, >>> probably no more than 3 or 4 in most cases, from each project team. >>> [...] > >> I didn't see this before the q1 or q2 tags - can the cycle highlights be >> applied retroactively? > > Cycle highlights are a once-at-the-end-of-the-cycle thing, not a > per-milestone or per-intermediary-release thing. So you don't need to > apply anything retroactively for the q1 or q2 milestones. > > Basically near the end of the cycle, you look back at what got done in > the past 6 months and extract a few key messaging points. Then we build > a page with all the answers and point all marketing people to it -- > which should avoid duplication of effort in answering a dozen separate > information requests. > > -- > Thierry Carrez (ttx) > > __ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org > <mailto:openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org>?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > <http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev> __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] TC Report 48
Rereading your question, Gord, the tl;dr of my message is that current roadmap is not intended to dictate work or what future features should be—just captures and communicates work already in motion. Anne Bertucio Marketing and Certification, OpenStack Foundation a...@openstack.org | 206-992-7961 > On Nov 29, 2017, at 9:27 AM, Anne Bertucio <a...@openstack.org> wrote: > > The community does have an existing Roadmap, albeit this cycle we decided we > need to change how we design the Roadmap and its final form. We have a small > community Roadmap team (anyone want to join?!) who compiles this information. > > > In the past, the Roadmap aimed to be a document for both project teams, end > users, and anyone in between. It tried to capture what was coming in the next > release as well as predict up to 3 releases forward. We decided this was > biting off far too much—trying to be all things to all people. > > What we’re trying to do now is be a user-focused document that communicates > critical changes and exciting features coming in the next release. We want to > help people who are evaluating OpenStack see future features, and help people > who are less privy to the day-to-day dev channels be aware of features that > may affect them. > > The Roadmap that was presented in Sydney lives here: > https://www.openstack.org/software/roadmap > <https://www.openstack.org/software/roadmap> > > > Anne Bertucio > OpenStack Foundation > a...@openstack.org <mailto:a...@openstack.org> > > > > >> On Nov 29, 2017, at 9:10 AM, gordon chung <g...@live.ca >> <mailto:g...@live.ca>> wrote: >> >> >> >> On 2017-11-28 11:36 AM, Chris Dent wrote: >>> * A somewhat bizarre presentation suggesting the Board and the TC >>> manage the OpenStack roadmap. There wasn't time to actually discuss >>> this as previous topics ran _way_ over, but at a superficial glance >>> it appeared to involve a complete misunderstanding of not just how >>> open source works in OpenStack, but how open source works in >>> general. >> >> was this topic to discuss how to implement an existing roadmap or how >> the board/tc should build a roadmap or something else completely? if the >> first, is there a link to this 'roadmap'? >> >> cheers, >> >> -- >> gord >> __ >> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) >> Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org >> <mailto:openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org>?subject:unsubscribe >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >> <http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev> > > __ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] TC Report 48
The community does have an existing Roadmap, albeit this cycle we decided we need to change how we design the Roadmap and its final form. We have a small community Roadmap team (anyone want to join?!) who compiles this information. In the past, the Roadmap aimed to be a document for both project teams, end users, and anyone in between. It tried to capture what was coming in the next release as well as predict up to 3 releases forward. We decided this was biting off far too much—trying to be all things to all people. What we’re trying to do now is be a user-focused document that communicates critical changes and exciting features coming in the next release. We want to help people who are evaluating OpenStack see future features, and help people who are less privy to the day-to-day dev channels be aware of features that may affect them. The Roadmap that was presented in Sydney lives here: https://www.openstack.org/software/roadmap <https://www.openstack.org/software/roadmap> Anne Bertucio OpenStack Foundation a...@openstack.org > On Nov 29, 2017, at 9:10 AM, gordon chung <g...@live.ca> wrote: > > > > On 2017-11-28 11:36 AM, Chris Dent wrote: >> * A somewhat bizarre presentation suggesting the Board and the TC >> manage the OpenStack roadmap. There wasn't time to actually discuss >> this as previous topics ran _way_ over, but at a superficial glance >> it appeared to involve a complete misunderstanding of not just how >> open source works in OpenStack, but how open source works in >> general. > > was this topic to discuss how to implement an existing roadmap or how > the board/tc should build a roadmap or something else completely? if the > first, is there a link to this 'roadmap'? > > cheers, > > -- > gord > __ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
[openstack-dev] [release][ptl] Improving the process for release marketing
Release marketing is a critical part of sharing what’s new in each release, and we want to rework how the marketing community and projects work together to make the release communications happen. Having multiple, repetetive demands to summarize "top features" during release time can be pestering and having to recollect the information each time isn't an effective use of time. Being asked to make polished, "press-friendly" messages out of release notes can feel too far outside of the PTL's focus areas or skills. At the same time, for technical content marketers, attempting to find the key features from release notes, ML posts, specs, Roadmap, etc., means interesting features are sometimes overlooked. Marketing teams don't have the latest on what features landed and with what caveats. To address this gap, the Release team and Foundation marketing team propose collecting information as part of the release tagging process. Similar to the existing (unused) "highlights" field for an individual tag, we will collect some text in the deliverable file to provide highlights for the series (about 3 items). That text will then be used to build a landing page on release.openstack.org that shows the "key features" flagged by PTLs that marketing teams should be looking at during release communication times. The page will link to the release notes, so marketers can start there to gather additional information, eliminating repetitive asks of PTLs. The "pre selection" of features means marketers can spend more time diving into release note details and less sifting through them. To supplement the written information, the marketing community is also going to work together to consolidate follow up questions and deliver them in "press corps" style (i.e. a single phone call to be asked questions from multiple parties vs. multiple phone calls from individuals). We will provide more details about the implementation for the highlights page when that is ready, but want to gather feedback about both aspects of the plan early. Thanks for your input, Anne Bertucio and Sean McGinnis __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
