Re: [Openstack-operators] [User-committee] Stepping aside announcement

[Shamail Tahir]

> On Jan 29, 2018, at 12:12 PM, Edgar Magana  wrote:
> 
> Dear Community,
>  
> This is an overdue announcement but I was waiting for the right moment and 
> today it is with the opening of the UC election. It has been almost seven 
> years of full commitment to OpenStack and the entire ecosystem around it. 
> During the last couple of years, I had the opportunity to serve as Chair of 
> the User Committee. I have participated in this role with nothing more 
> important but passion and dedication for the users and operators. OpenStack 
> has been very important for me and it will be always the most enjoyable work 
> I have ever done.
>  
> It is time to move on. Our team is extending its focus to other cloud domains 
> and I will be leading one of the those. Therefore, I would like to announce 
> that I am stepping aside from my role as UC Chair. Per our UC election, there 
> will be no just 2 seats available but three: 
> https://governance.openstack.org/uc/reference/uc-election-feb2018.html

Thank you for everything you’ve done for the community thus far Edgar! Your 
leadership has been instrumental in helping us evolve over the last 2-3 cycles. 
I hope you are still able to participate in the community even after you leave 
the User Committee.
>  
> I want to encourage the whole AUC community to participate, be part of the 
> User Committee is a very important and grateful activity. Please, go for it!
>  
> Thank you all,
>  
> Edgar Magana
> Sr. Principal Architect
> Workday, Inc.
>  
>  
>  
> ___
> User-committee mailing list
> user-commit...@lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/user-committee
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] User Committee Meeting Reminder for Dec. 4th

[Shamail Tahir]

Hi everyone,

The User Committee will be meeting today at 1400UTC in #openstack-uc. You can 
review the agenda on our wiki[1]. We hope to see you there!

Thanks,
User Committee

[1] 
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/UserCommittee#Meeting_Agenda.2FPrevious_Meeting_Logs___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] User Committee meeting cancelled for 11/27

[Shamail Tahir]

Hi everyone,

The User Committee meeting scheduled for 11/27 is being cancelled since we will 
not have quorum. Please see the wiki[1] for agenda items that will be covered 
in our next meeting (12/4). Please add any other topics that you would like to 
discuss on our proposed agenda on the wiki page[1].

If there are any items that can not wait until next week, please start an email 
thread on the User Committee mailing list.

Thank you,
User Committee

[1] 
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/UserCommittee#Meeting_Agenda.2FPrevious_Meeting_Logs___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

Re: [Openstack-operators] It's time...

[Shamail Tahir]

Hi Tom,

Thank you for everything that you have contributed to the community and for the 
time/energy you invested in helping the project and our global user communities 
grow to tremendous heights.

I also want to sincerely thank you for the personal impact you’ve had on my 
path within the community and general guidance throughout the years.

You will be sorely missed and I echo the others when I say that we hope to see 
you around.

I won’t be around Sydney so I’m hoping we get a future opportunity to share 
some Moscow mules and trade stories. I would be disappointed if our paths 
didn’t cross again!

Continue fighting for the users in your future endeavors.

Take care,
Shamail 

> On Oct 4, 2017, at 10:20 AM, Tom Fifield <t...@openstack.org> wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> Tom here, on a personal note.
> 
> It's quite fitting that this November our summit is in Australia :)
> 
> I'm hoping to see you there because after being part of 15 releases, and 
> travelling the equivalent of a couple of round trips to the moon to witness 
> OpenStack grow around the world, the timing is right for me to step down as 
> your Community Manager.
> 
> We've had an incredible journey together, culminating in the healthy 
> community we have today. Across more than 160 countries, users and developers 
> collaborate to make clouds better for the work that matters. The diversity of 
> use is staggering, and the scale of resources being run is quite significant. 
> We did that :)
> 
> 
> Behind the scenes, I've spent the past couple of months preparing to 
> transition various tasks to other members of the Foundation staff. If you see 
> a new name behind an openstack.org email address, please give them due 
> attention and care - they're all great people. I'll be around through to year 
> end to shepherd the process, so please ping me if you are worried about 
> anything.
> 
> Always remember, you are what makes OpenStack. OpenStack changes and thrives 
> based on how you feel and what work you do. It's been a privilege to share 
> the journey with you.
> 
> 
> 
> So, my plan? After a decade of diligent effort in organisations 
> euphemistically described as "minimally-staffed", I'm looking forward to 
> taking a decent holiday. Though, if you have a challenge interesting enough 
> to wrest someone from a tropical beach or a misty mountain top ... ;)
> 
> 
> There are a lot of you out there to whom I remain indebted. Stay in touch to 
> make sure your owed drinks make it to you!
> 
> +886 988 33 1200
> t...@tomfifield.net
> https://www.linkedin.com/in/tomfifield
> https://twitter.com/TomFifield
> 
> 
> 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] User Committee Weekly IRC meeting reminder (9/25/2017)

[Shamail Tahir]

Hi everyone,

The User Committee will be meeting later today. The agenda can be found on
our wiki page[1] and the meeting details are on eavesdrop[2]. We hope to
see you there!

[1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/UserCommittee#
Meeting_Agenda.2FPrevious_Meeting_Logs
[2] http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/#User_Committee_Meeting

-- 
Thanks,
Shamail Tahir
t: @ShamailXD
tz: Eastern Time
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] Sydney Forum Topic Submission

[Shamail Tahir]

Hi,

We have made it to the next stage of the topic selection process for the
Forum in Sydney!

At the Forum the entire OpenStack community (users and developers) gathers
to brainstorm the requirements for the next release, gather feedback on the
past version and have strategic discussions that go beyond just one release
cycle. The Sydney Forum is the start of the Rocky release cycle. Please
prepare session ideas with feedback from the Pike release in mind.

Our submission tool is now open for you to submit abstracts for the most
popular sessions that came out of your brainstorming.

Ask all session leaders to submit their abstracts at:
http://forumtopics.openstack.org/

before *11:59PM UTC on Friday September 29th*!

We are looking for a good mix of project-specific, cross-project or
strategic/whole-of-community discussions, and sessions that emphasize
collaboration between users and developers are most welcome!

We assume that anything submitted to the Forum Topics Tool has achieved a
good amount of discussion and consensus that it's a worthwhile topic. After
submissions close, a team of representatives from the User Committee, the
Technical Committee, and Foundation staff will take the sessions proposed
by the community and fill out the schedule.

You can expect the draft schedule to be released on October 9th, 2017.

Further details about the Forum can be found at:
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Forum

Regards,
User Committee/Technical Committee
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] Forum Topic Submission

[Shamail Tahir]

Hi Forum Brainstormers,

Wow! Some great topics in the etherpads so far. This event is going to be
amazing.

We're less than a week away now from opening the "formal submission" part
of the process.

If you haven't already, please start prioritizing the top sessions from
your list of ideas. Starting next week, the formal submission will ask for
a written abstract, and one or more session leaders for each session you
want to submit.

Late to the party? Check out the topic brainstorming at:
*https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Forum/Sydney2017*


and on a mailing list near you!

Thanks,
User Committee/Technical Committee
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] User Committee Weekly IRC meeting reminder (8/28/2017)

[Shamail Tahir]

Hi everyone,

The User Committee will be meeting later today. The agenda can be found on
our wiki page and the meeting details are on eavesdrop.

[1]
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/UserCommittee#Meeting_Agenda.2FPrevious_Meeting_Logs
[2] http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/#User_Committee_Meeting

-- 
Thanks,
Shamail Tahir
t: @ShamailXD
tz: Eastern Time
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] User Committee meeting cancelled for 8/7/2017

[Shamail Tahir]

Hi everyone,

There are no new agenda topics for the User Committee and therefore we are 
cancelling the meeting for today. We hope the Ops meetup in Mexico City later 
this week is a fun and productive event for everyone!

Thanks,
User Committee


___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

Re: [Openstack-operators] [User-committee] Non-Candidacy for UC Election August 2017

[Shamail Tahir]

Jon,

Thank you for giving so much time and effort to helping our user community grow 
and prosper. I hope this is a "see you soon" moment and not a "goodbye".  It's 
been a pleasure and an honor being on same committee.

Thanks again for all that you have done!

Sincerely,
Shamail 

> On Aug 3, 2017, at 4:11 PM, Jonathan Proulx <j...@csail.mit.edu> wrote:
> 
> Hello All,
> 
> It has been an honor and a privelege to serve on the OpenStack User
> Committee.  As the longest serving member I feel it's time to make way
> for the new and as such I will not be standing for ellection in the
> current cycle.
> 
> If you have an interest in representing the interest of OpenStack
> users please nominate yourself!
> 
> We do need candidates to serve and nominations are now open through
> August 11, 05:59 UTC
> 
> Three seats (of five) are up for election. see
> https://governance.openstack.org/uc/reference/uc-election-aug2017.html
> 
> from that page:
> 
> Self-nomination is common, no third party nomination is required. They
> do so by sending an email to the user-commit...@lists.openstack.org
> mailing-list, with the subject: “UC candidacy” by August 11, 05:59
> UTC. The email can include a description of the candidate
> platform. The candidacy is then confirmed by one of the election
> officials, after verification of the electorate status of the
> candidate.
> 
> 
> -Jon
> 
> Jonathan Proulx
> Sr. Technical Architect
> MIT CSAIL
> 
> ___
> User-committee mailing list
> user-commit...@lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/user-committee

___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

Re: [Openstack-operators] [User-committee] [all] Announcement: Public Cloud WG

[Shamail Tahir]

> On Aug 3, 2017, at 11:33 AM, Edgar Magana <edgar.mag...@workday.com> wrote:
> 
> Congratulations Folks!
>  
> Looking forward to hearing good progress from this WG.
+1, thanks for all the great work you have already been doing and look forward 
to your continued successes. I would like to encourage other working groups to 
reach out to the Public Cloud WG if you are discussing efforts that could 
benefit from their perspective/insights.

>  
> Cheers,
>  
> Edgar
>  
> From: Melvin Hillsman <mrhills...@gmail.com>
> Date: Wednesday, August 2, 2017 at 3:11 PM
> To: user-committee <user-commit...@lists.openstack.org>, OpenStack Operators 
> <openstack-operators@lists.openstack.org>, OpenStack Mailing List 
> <openst...@lists.openstack.org>
> Subject: [User-committee] [all] Announcement: Public Cloud WG
>  
> Hi everyone,
>  
> We would like to announce the Public Cloud WG now being officially under 
> OpenStack governance! This group has been working very hard for some time and 
> have continued to progress through the consistency of its chairs and members. 
> We are looking forward to hearing great feedback and working together with 
> the Public Cloud WG to continue the success of OpenStack!
>  
> --
> Kind regards,
> 
> OpenStack User Committee
> (Shilla, Shamail, Melvin, Jon, Edgar)
> ___
> User-committee mailing list
> user-commit...@lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/user-committee
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] Reminder: User Committee Meeting on 7/31/2017

[Shamail Tahir]

Hi everyone,

The User Committee will be meeting on 07/31/2017 since we have items on the
agenda[1], please feel free to append additional topics as well. You can
find meeting details on eavesdrop[2].

[1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/UserCommittee#
Meeting_Agenda.2FPrevious_Meeting_Logs
[2] http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/#User_Committee_Meeting

-- 
Thanks,
Shamail Tahir
t: @ShamailXD
tz: Eastern Time
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] Reminder: User Committee meeting on 07/17/2017

[Shamail Tahir]

Hi everyone,

The User Committee will be meeting today since we have items on the
agenda[1]. You can find meeting details on eavesdrop[2].

[1]
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/UserCommittee#Meeting_Agenda.2FPrevious_Meeting_Logs
[2] http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/#User_Committee_Meeting

-- 
Thanks,
Shamail Tahir
t: @ShamailXD
tz: Eastern Time
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] [Forum] Moderators needed!

[Shamail Tahir]

Hi everyone,

Most of the proposed/accepted Forum sessions currently have moderators but
there are six sessions that do not have a confirmed moderator yet. Please
look at the list below and let us know if you would be willing to help
moderate any of these sessions.

The topics look really interesting but it will be difficult to keep the
sessions on the schedule if there is not an assigned moderator. We look
forward to seeing you at the Summit/Forum in Boston soon!

Achieving Resiliency at Scales of 1000+
<https://www.openstack.org/summit/boston-2017/summit-schedule/events/18776/achieving-resiliency-at-scales-of-1000>
Feedback from users for I18n & translation - important part?
<https://www.openstack.org/summit/boston-2017/summit-schedule/events/18692/docsi18n-project-onoboarding>
Neutron Pain Points
<https://www.openstack.org/summit/boston-2017/summit-schedule/events/18801/neutron-pain-points>
Making Neutron easy for people who want basic networking
<https://www.openstack.org/summit/boston-2017/summit-schedule/events/18800/making-neutron-easy-for-people-who-want-basic-networking>
High Availability in OpenStack
<https://www.openstack.org/summit/boston-2017/summit-schedule/events/18802/high-availability-in-openstack>
Cloud-Native Design/Refactoring across OpenStack
<https://www.openstack.org/summit/boston-2017/summit-schedule/events/18767/cloud-native-designrefactoring-across-openstack>


Thanks,
Doug, Emilien, Melvin, Mike, Shamail & Tom
Forum Scheduling Committee
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] Fwd: [openstack-dev] [keystone][all] Reseller - do we need it?

[Shamail Tahir]

Hi Operators and Working Groups,

Please see the thread below... Keystone is looking for use cases related to the 
"reseller"/hierarchical multi-tenancy capabilities.  I'm sure your input would 
be appreciated!

Regards,
Shamail 


Begin forwarded message:

> From: Lance Bragstad <lbrags...@gmail.com>
> Date: March 16, 2017 at 10:10:03 PM GMT+1
> To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" 
> <openstack-...@lists.openstack.org>
> Subject: [openstack-dev] [keystone][all] Reseller - do we need it?
> Reply-To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List \(not for usage questions\)" 
> <openstack-...@lists.openstack.org>
> 
> Hey folks,
> 
> The reseller use case [0] has been popping up frequently in various 
> discussions [1], including unified limits.
> 
> For those who are unfamiliar with the reseller concept, it came out of early 
> discussions regarding hierarchical multi-tenancy (HMT). It essentially allows 
> a certain level of opaqueness within project trees. This opaqueness would 
> make it easier for providers to "resell" infrastructure, without having 
> customers/providers see all the way up and down the project tree, hence it 
> was termed reseller. Keystone originally had some ideas of how to implement 
> this after the HMT implementation laid the ground work, but it was never 
> finished.
> 
> With it popping back up in conversations, I'm looking for folks who are 
> willing to represent the idea. Participating in this thread doesn't mean 
> you're on the hook for implementing it or anything like that. 
> 
> Are you interested in reseller and willing to provide use-cases?
> 
> 
> 
> [0] 
> http://specs.openstack.org/openstack/keystone-specs/specs/keystone/mitaka/reseller.html#problem-description
> __
> 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-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] Milan Ops Midcycle - AUC Overview Session

[Shamail Tahir]

Hi everyone,

The etherpad[1] for this session has been created and populated with an
initial set of topics for discussion. Please add items to the running list
as you see fit and we will finalize the agenda (based on the length of the
session) during the first couple of minutes of the session.

[1] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/MIL-ops-overview-of-auc

-- 
Thanks,
Shamail Tahir
t: @ShamailXD
tz: Eastern Time
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

Re: [Openstack-operators] User Committee IRC Meeting - Monday March 13th

[Shamail Tahir]

http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/#User_Committee_Meeting

> On Mar 13, 2017, at 4:45 PM,  
>  wrote:
> 
> Dell - Internal Use - Confidential
> 
> Can someone post the schedule for these meeings? 
>  
> From: Edgar Magana [mailto:edgar.mag...@workday.com] 
> Sent: Monday, March 13, 2017 4:24 PM
> To: user-commit...@lists.openstack.org; OpenStack Operators 
> ; openst...@lists.openstack.org
> Subject: [Openstack-operators] User Committee IRC Meeting - Monday March 13th
>  
> Dear UC Community,
>  
> As you know this week we are having the Ops Meetup in Milan. A very 
> significant number of members from the community is attending the event. We 
> are proposing to cancel this week UC IRC meeting. We will resume in two weeks 
> from now.
>  
> Enjoy the sessions in Milan.
>  
> Thanks,
>  
> User Committee
> ___
> 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] Fwd: [openstack-dev] [tc][swg][all] Leadership training sign-up is open!

[Shamail Tahir]

FYI, in case you missed this on the openstack-dev mailing list. Great
opportunity.

-- Forwarded message --
From: Colette Alexander <colettealexan...@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 3:16 PM
Subject: [openstack-dev] [tc][swg][all] Leadership training sign-up is open!
To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" <
openstack-...@lists.openstack.org>


Hello Stackers!

We're opening up the sign-up sheet for leadership training beyond the TC,
Board and Foundation staff to the whole community.

What: Leadership Training, customized for members of the OpenStack Community
When: April 11/12/13
Where: ZingTrain, in Ann Arbor, Michigan.

If you can confirm your ability to attend, please sign up here:
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/Leadershiptraining

There are a lot of details on that etherpad about timing, place,
recommended locations to stay, etc. You can also scroll down to read a
sample itinerary of subjects covered in the training. If you have any
questions at all, feel free to ask questions in this thread, or in
#openstack-swg as many folks who lurk in that channel have attended.

Some quick notes:

   - This is the exact same training that was done last year
   - We're planning on having 1-2 people attend who also attended training
   last year to give some context and continuity to the discussions.
   - The training costs are fully funded by the Foundation, and attendees
   only need to cover the cost of travel, lodging, and some meals (breakfast
   and lunch during training is provided).
   - We're capping attendance at 20 people.
   - I'd like to finalize our list by March 24th, so please start the work
   of getting travel approvals, etc., now.

If there are any past attendees who'd like to chime in in response to this
to discuss your experiences with training, please do! Please feel free to
ping me on IRC (I'm gothicmindfood) if you have any other questions.

Thanks so much,

-colette/gothicmindfood

__
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




-- 
Thanks,
Shamail Tahir
t: @ShamailXD
tz: Eastern Time
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

Re: [Openstack-operators] Forum Brainstorming???

[Shamail Tahir]

Thanks Stig.  I added your etherpad to the wiki page[1].

[1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Forum/Boston2017#Team-specific

On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 5:13 AM, Stig Telfer <stig.openst...@telfer.org>
wrote:

> Thanks Shamail -
>
> We’ve just completed a first pass on our brainstorming in the Scientific
> WG.  Some ideas from a research computing perspective are here:
>
> https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/BOS-UC-brainstorming-scientific-wg
>
> More input from WG members (and anyone else) is of course welcome and
> appreciated.
>
> Best wishes,
> Stig
>
>
> > On 27 Feb 2017, at 20:38, Shamail Tahir <itzsham...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > Welcome to the topic selection process for our first Forum in Boston. If
> you've participated in an ops meetup before, this should seem pretty
> comfortable. If not, note that this is not a classic conference track with
> speakers and presentations. OpenStack community members (participants in
> development teams, working groups, and other interested individuals)
> discuss the topics they want to cover and get alignment on and we welcome
> your participation.
> >
> > The Forum is for the entire community to come together; create a neutral
> space rather than having separate “ops” and “dev” days. Boston marks the
> start of the Queen's release cycle, where ideas and requirements will be
> gathered. Users should aim to come armed with feedback from February's
> Ocata release if at all possible. We aim to ensure the broadest coverage of
> topics that will allow for multiple parts of the community getting together
> to discuss key areas within our community/projects.
> >
> > Examples of the types of discussions and some sessions that might fit
> within each one:
> >   • Strategic, whole-of-community discussions, to think about the
> big picture, including beyond just one release cycle and new technologies
> >   • eg Making OpenStack One Platform for containers/VMs/Bare Metal
> (Strategic session) the entire community congregates to share opinions on
> how to make OpenStack achieve its integration engine goal
> >   • Cross-project sessions, in a similar vein to what has happened
> at past design summits, but with increased emphasis on issues that are
> relevant to all areas of the community
> >   • eg Rolling Upgrades at Scale (Cross-Project session) – the Large
> Deployments Team collaborates with Nova, Cinder and Keystone to tackle
> issues that come up with rolling upgrades when there’s a large number of
> machines.
> >   • Project-specific sessions, where developers can ask users
> specific questions about their experience, users can provide feedback from
> the last release and cross-community collaboration on the priorities, and
> ‘blue sky’ ideas for the next release.
> >   • eg Neutron Pain Points (Project-Specific session) – Co-organized
> by neutron developers and users. Neutron developers bring some specific
> questions they want answered, Neutron users bring feedback from the latest
> release and ideas about the future.
> >
> > There are two stages to the brainstorming:
> > 1. Starting today, set up an etherpad with your group/team, or use
> one on the list and start discussing ideas you'd like to talk about at the
> Forum. Then, through +1s on etherpads and mailing list discussion, work out
> which ones are the most needed - just like you did prior to the ops events.
> > 2. Then, in a couple of weeks, we will open up a more formal
> web-based tool for submission of abstracts that came out of the
> brainstorming on top.
> >
> > We expect working groups may make their own etherpads, however the User
> Committee offers a catch-all to get the widest feedback possible:
> > https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/BOS-UC-brainstorming
> >
> > Feel free to use that, or make one for your group and add it to the list
> at: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Forum/Boston2017
> >
> > Thanks,
> > User Committee
> > ___
> > OpenStack-operators mailing list
> > OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
>
>


-- 
Thanks,
Shamail Tahir
t: @ShamailXD
tz: Eastern Time
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] Forum Brainstorming???

[Shamail Tahir]

Hi everyone,

Welcome to the topic selection process for our first Forum in Boston. If
you've participated in an ops meetup before, this should seem pretty
comfortable. If not, note that this is *not* a classic conference track
with speakers and presentations. OpenStack community members (participants
in development teams, working groups, and other interested individuals)
discuss the topics they want to cover and get alignment on and we welcome
your participation.

The Forum is for the entire community to come together; create a neutral
space rather than having separate “ops” and “dev” days. Boston marks the
start of the Queen's release cycle, where ideas and requirements will be
gathered. Users should aim to come armed with feedback from February's
Ocata release if at all possible. We aim to ensure the broadest coverage of
topics that will allow for multiple parts of the community getting together
to discuss key areas within our community/projects.

Examples of the types of discussions and some sessions that might fit
within each one:

   - *Strategic, whole-of-community discussions*, to think about the big
   picture, including beyond just one release cycle and new technologies


   - eg *Making OpenStack One Platform for containers/VMs/Bare Metal*
(Strategic
   session) the entire community congregates to share opinions on how to make
   OpenStack achieve its integration engine goal


   - *Cross-project sessions*, in a similar vein to what has happened at
   past design summits, but with increased emphasis on issues that are
   relevant to all areas of the community


   - eg *Rolling Upgrades at Scale* (Cross-Project session) – the Large
   Deployments Team collaborates with Nova, Cinder and Keystone to tackle
   issues that come up with rolling upgrades when there’s a large number of
   machines.


   - *Project-specific sessions*, where developers can ask users specific
   questions about their experience, users can provide feedback from the last
   release and cross-community collaboration on the priorities, and ‘blue sky’
   ideas for the next release.


   - *eg Neutron Pain* *Points* (Project-Specific session) – Co-organized
   by neutron developers and users. Neutron developers bring some specific
   questions they want answered, Neutron users bring feedback from the latest
   release and ideas about the future.


There are two stages to the brainstorming:
1. Starting today, set up an etherpad with your group/team, or use one
on the list and start discussing ideas you'd like to talk about at the
Forum. Then, through +1s on etherpads and mailing list discussion, work out
which ones are the most needed - just like you did prior to the ops
events.
2. Then, in a couple of weeks, we will open up a more formal web-based
tool for submission of abstracts that came out of the brainstorming on top.

We expect working groups may make their own etherpads, however the User
Committee offers a catch-all to get the widest feedback possible:
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/BOS-UC-brainstorming

Feel free to use that, or make one for your group and add it to the list
at: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Forum/Boston2017

Thanks,
User Committee 
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

Re: [Openstack-operators] [User-committee] User Committee elections

[Shamail]

> On Feb 17, 2017, at 7:39 PM, Melvin Hillsman <mrhills...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Thank you to everyone who voted, the election committee, and the others who 
> ran. I consider it an honor and privilege and am looking forward to the 
> coming days.
+1, well said!
> 
> --
> Melvin Hillsman
> Ops Technical Lead
> OpenStack Innovation Center
> mrhills...@gmail.com
> phone: (210) 312-1267
> mobile: (210) 413-1659
> Learner | Ideation | Belief | Responsibility | Command
> http://osic.org
> 
>> On Feb 17, 2017, at 18:10, Matt Jarvis <m...@mattjarvis.org.uk> wrote:
>> 
>> Hi All
>> 
>> I'm very pleased to announce the results of the first User Committee 
>> elections, which closed at 21.59UTC on the 17th February 2017.
>> 
>> The two candidates elected to the User Committee are Melvin Hillsman and 
>> Shamail Tahir. 
>> 
>> Congratulations to Melvin and Shamail, I know they will both do an excellent 
>> job in representing our community. 
>> 
>> Thank you to the other candidates who participated, and to everyone who 
>> voted. 
>> 
>> Full results of the poll can be found at 
>> http://civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/results.pl?id=E_4ec37f2d06428110. 
>> 
>> Matt
>> 
>> ___
>> User-committee mailing list
>> user-commit...@lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/user-committee
> ___
> User-committee mailing list
> user-commit...@lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/user-committee
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

Re: [Openstack-operators] [User-committee] UC Bylaws Changes - Approved!

[Shamail]

Great work everyone and, in particular, Edgar, Jon, and Shilla!

> On Dec 6, 2016, at 11:39 AM, Matt Jarvis  wrote:
> 
> Awesome work - well done Edgar and team !
> 
>> On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 4:26 PM, Edgar Magana  
>> wrote:
>> Team,
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> I am gladly informing you that the BoD has just approved our proposal to 
>> change the OpenStack Bylaws:
>> 
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1QmLOeseAkjBWM_TXsUeKBErNaSHnuZp81II0T71ARfo/edit?usp=sharing
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> This is a huge step to bring the visibility and empowerment that we were 
>> looking to have from the OpenStack User perspective.
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> I want to thank you all! You made this possible because of your support, 
>> guidance and motivation.
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> We have a lot of more work to do but for today we can take a break and 
>> celebrate.
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> OpenStack User Committee,
>> 
>> Shilla Saebi, Jon Proulx and Edgar Magana
>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> User-committee mailing list
>> user-commit...@lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/user-committee
>> 
> 
> ___
> User-committee mailing list
> user-commit...@lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/user-committee
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] [recognition] AUC Recognition WG is being disbanded

[Shamail Tahir]

Hi everyone,

The team worked diligently over the last few months to identify user
contributions that benefit the entirety of the OpenStack community and to
help get these contributors recognized as Active User Contributors (AUC).
The AUC is the constituency for the User Committee and will be the voting
body for User Committee elections in the future.

With the approval of the updated by-laws and User Committee charter earlier
today[1], we have completed our objective of defining AUC.  The User
Committee members can take ownership of any future adjustments that need to
be made to the AUC criteria[2].

Our wiki[3] has been updated to reflect our status and I have also
submitted a patch to cancel our weekly team meeting[4].

I would like to thank everyone on the team for staying focused on the
objective and helping us achieve this important task!

AUC Recognition WG participants:
carolbarrett
dabukalam
dc_mattj
emagana
jproulx
maishsk (co-chair)
meganr
mrhillsman
pfreund
pholland
rstarmer
shamail (co-chair)
swdevangel


[1]
http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/user-committee/2016-December/001480.html
[2] http://www.slideshare.net/ShamailXD/openstack-auc-overview
[3] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/AUCRecognition
[4] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/407637/

-- 
Thanks,
Shamail Tahir
t: @ShamailXD
tz: Eastern Time
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] [recognition] AUC Recognition WG meeting today (11/10) @ 1900 UTC

[Shamail Tahir]

Hi everyone,

The AUC Recognition WG team will be meeting today at 1900 UTC, which is an
hour earlier in locations where daylight savings time just ended.  Details
can be found on our wiki[1]. See you there.

*Agenda*
* AUC Activities recap from OpenStack Summit (maishk)
** https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/BCN-ops-AUC
* Open


[1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/AUCRecognition#Meeting_Information

-- 
Thanks,
Shamail Tahir
t: @ShamailXD
tz: Eastern Time
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] [recognition] AUC Recognition WG Meeting Reminder (10/06)

[Shamail Tahir]

Hi everyone,

The AUC recognition WG will be meeting on October 6th, 2016 at 1900 UTC.
The details can be found on our wiki page[1].  See you there!

*Agenda*
* Review status of open action items
* Items needed for UC readout
* Open


[1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/AUCRecognition#Meeting_Information

-- 
Thanks,
Shamail Tahir
t: @ShamailXD
tz: Eastern Time
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] [recognition] Weekly team meeting reminder: Today at 1900UTC

[Shamail Tahir]

Hi everyone,

The AUC recognition WG will be meeting on September 22nd, 2016 at 1900
UTC.  The details can be found on our wiki page[1].  See you there!

*Agenda*
* Review status of open action items
* Items needed for UC readout
* Open


[1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/AUCRecognition#Meeting_Information

-- 
Thanks,
Shamail Tahir
t: @ShamailXD
tz: Eastern Time
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] [recognition] AUC Recognition WG Meeting Reminder (09/01)

[Shamail Tahir]

Hi everyone,

The AUC recognition WG will be meeting on September 1st, 2016 at 1900 UTC.
The details can be found on our wiki page[1].  See you there!

*Agenda*
* Review feedback from Ops Meetup
** https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/NYC-ops-AUC
* Develop plan to close out WG in next 2-3 weeks


[1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/AUCRecognition#Meeting_Information

-- 
Thanks,
Shamail Tahir
t: @ShamailXD
tz: Eastern Time
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] [AUC] Weekly Meeting Cancelled for 8/25

[Shamail]

Hi,

We are cancelling the AUC Recognition WG meeting this week due to the OpenStack 
events in NYC.  We will resume our normal schedule next week.  

Thanks,
Shamail 

___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

Re: [Openstack-operators] [OSOps] [OpenStack-DefCore] Ansible work load test for interop patch set

[Shamail]

> On Aug 16, 2016, at 1:44 PM, Christopher Aedo  wrote:
> 
> Tong Li, I think the best place to ask for a look would be the
> Operators mailing list
> (http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators).
> I've cc'd that list here, though it looks like you've already got a +2
> on it at least.
+1

I had contacted JJ earlier and he told me that the best person to contact would 
be Joseph Bajin (RaginBajin in IRC).  I've also added an OSOps tag to this 
message.
> 
> -Christopher
> 
>> On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 7:59 AM, Tong Li  wrote:
>> The patch set has been submitted to github for awhile, can some one please
>> review the patch set here?
>> 
>> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/354194/
>> 
>> Thanks very much!
>> 
>> Tong Li
>> IBM Open Technology
>> Building 501/B205
>> liton...@us.ibm.com
>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> Defcore-committee mailing list
>> defcore-commit...@lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/defcore-committee
> 
> ___
> Defcore-committee mailing list
> defcore-commit...@lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/defcore-committee

___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] [recognition] AUC Recognition Meeting on 08/04/2016

[Shamail Tahir]

Hi everyone,

The AUC recognition WG will be meeting on August 4th, 2016 at 1900 UTC.
The agenda can be found on our wiki page[1].  See you there!

[1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/AUCRecognition#Meeting_Information

-- 
Thanks,
Shamail Tahir
t: @ShamailXD
tz: Eastern Time
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] [tags] Team meeting on 7/21

[Shamail]

Hi everyone,

The ops-tags[1] team will be meeting on 7/21 at 1400 UTC in #openstack-meeting. 
 

Agenda:
- Review open changes
- Discuss how the install guide change impacts the install guide tag beyond the 
minor updates (if at all)
- Revisit tags discussed in Austin and build an action plan

We hope to see you there!

Thanks,
Shamail___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] [recognition] AUC Recognition WG Meeting Notice

[Shamail Tahir]

Hi everyone,

The AUC Recognition WG will be meeting today (July 14th) at 1900 UTC.
Meeting details and agenda can be found on our wiki page[1].  See you there!

[1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/AUCRecognition#Meeting_Information

-- 
Thanks,
Shamail Tahir
t: @ShamailXD
tz: Eastern Time
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

Re: [Openstack-operators] [User-committee] Seeking feedback: Active User Contributor (AUC) eligibility requirements

[Shamail]

> On Jul 6, 2016, at 5:44 PM, Lauren Sell <lau...@openstack.org> wrote:
> 
> Hi Rocky,
> 
> Agreed! I think that’s the intent of the first bullet — official user group 
> organizers.

Completely agree, they are a vital part of the community and often are the 
first aspect of community that newcomers experience.  The first bullet is 
intended to ensure they are included in AUC.
> 
> Cheers,
> Lauren
> 
> 
>> On Jul 6, 2016, at 4:42 PM, Rochelle Grober <rochelle.gro...@huawei.com> 
>> wrote:
>> 
>> Umm, I see a major contribution area not included here:
>> 
>> OpenStack community meetup organizers.  I know some sink a large amount of 
>> time scheduling and organizing at least one a month, some two or more.  
>> These organizers are critical for getting info out on OpenStack and 
>> familiarizing their local tech communities with the OpenStack project.  I 
>> hope they are included somewhere for their contributions.
>> 
>> --Rocky
>> 
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Jonathan D. Proulx [mailto:j...@csail.mit.edu] 
>> Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2016 12:00 PM
>> To: Shamail Tahir
>> Cc: openstack-operators; user-committee
>> Subject: Re: [User-committee] Seeking feedback: Active User Contributor 
>> (AUC) eligibility requirements
>> 
>> 
>> I'm surprised this hasn't generated more feed back, though I'd
>> generally take that as positive.
>> 
>> List seems good to me.
>> 
>> The self nomintaion + confirm by UC is a good catch all especially in
>> the beginning where we're unlikely to have though of everything.  We
>> can always expand criterial later if the 'misc' of UC confirmantion
>> gets too big and we idnetify patterns.
>> 
>> Thanks all!
>> -Jon
>> 
>> On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 04:52:00PM -0400, Shamail Tahir wrote:
>> :Hi everyone,
>> :
>> :The AUC Recognition WG has been hard at work on milestone-4 of our plan
>> :which is to identify the eligibility criteria for each community
>> :contributor role that is covered by AUC.  We had a great mix of community
>> :people involved in defining these thresholds but we wanted to also open
>> :this up for broader community feedback before we propose them to the user
>> :committee.  AUC is a new concept and we hope to make iterative improvements
>> :going forward... you can consider the guidelines below as "version 1" and I
>> :am certain they will evolve as lessons are learned.  Thank you in advance
>> :for your feedback!
>> :
>> :*  Official User Group organizers
>> :
>> :o   Listed as an organizer or coordinator for an official OpenStack user
>> :group
>> :
>> :*  Active members of official UC Working Groups
>> :
>> :o   Attend 25% of the IRC meetings and have spoken more than 25 times OR
>> :have spoken more than 100 times regardless of attendance count over the
>> :last six months
>> :
>> :o   WG that do not use IRC for their meetings will depend on the meeting
>> :chair(s) to identify active participation from attendees
>> :
>> :*  Ops meetup moderators
>> :
>> :o   Moderate a session at the operators meetup over the last six
>> :months AND/OR
>> :
>> :o   Host the operators meetup (limit 2 people from the hosting
>> :organization) over the last six months
>> :
>> :*  Contributions to any repository under UC governance (ops
>> :repositories, user stories repository, etc.)
>> :
>> :o   Submitted two or more patches to a UC governed repository over the last
>> :six months
>> :
>> :*  Track chairs for OpenStack Summits
>> :
>> :o   Identified track chair for the upcoming OpenStack Summit (based on when
>> :data is gathered) [this is a forward-facing metric]
>> :
>> :*  Contributors to Superuser (articles, interviews, user stories, etc.)
>> :
>> :o   Listed as author in at least one publication at superuser.openstack.org
>> :over the last six months
>> :
>> :*  Submission for eligibility to AUC review panel
>> :
>> :o   No formal criteria, anyone can self-nominate, and nominations will be
>> :reviewed per guidance established in milestone-5
>> :
>> :*  Active moderators on ask.openstack
>> :
>> :o   Listed as moderator on Ask OpenStack and have over 500 karma
>> :
>> :There is additional information available in the etherpad[1] the AUC
>> :recognition WG has been using for this task which includes Q (question
>> :and answers) between team members.
>> :
>> :[1] https://etherpa

Re: [Openstack-operators] [User-committee] Seeking feedback: Active User Contributor (AUC) eligibility requirements

[Shamail Tahir]

On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 2:59 PM, Jonathan D. Proulx <j...@csail.mit.edu>
wrote:

>
> I'm surprised this hasn't generated more feed back, though I'd
> generally take that as positive.
>
> List seems good to me.
>
> The self nomintaion + confirm by UC is a good catch all especially in
> the beginning where we're unlikely to have though of everything.  We
> can always expand criterial later if the 'misc' of UC confirmantion
> gets too big and we idnetify patterns.
>
+1

That is the intention.. it will help us make sure that we didn't miss
anything and if we get a lot of requests for a certain activity then we can
expand the role definitions to include it.


>
> Thanks all!
> -Jon
>
> On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 04:52:00PM -0400, Shamail Tahir wrote:
> :Hi everyone,
> :
> :The AUC Recognition WG has been hard at work on milestone-4 of our plan
> :which is to identify the eligibility criteria for each community
> :contributor role that is covered by AUC.  We had a great mix of community
> :people involved in defining these thresholds but we wanted to also open
> :this up for broader community feedback before we propose them to the user
> :committee.  AUC is a new concept and we hope to make iterative
> improvements
> :going forward... you can consider the guidelines below as "version 1" and
> I
> :am certain they will evolve as lessons are learned.  Thank you in advance
> :for your feedback!
> :
> :·  Official User Group organizers
> :
> :o   Listed as an organizer or coordinator for an official OpenStack user
> :group
> :
> :·  Active members of official UC Working Groups
> :
> :o   Attend 25% of the IRC meetings and have spoken more than 25 times OR
> :have spoken more than 100 times regardless of attendance count over the
> :last six months
> :
> :o   WG that do not use IRC for their meetings will depend on the meeting
> :chair(s) to identify active participation from attendees
> :
> :·  Ops meetup moderators
> :
> :o   Moderate a session at the operators meetup over the last six
> :months AND/OR
> :
> :o   Host the operators meetup (limit 2 people from the hosting
> :organization) over the last six months
> :
> :·  Contributions to any repository under UC governance (ops
> :repositories, user stories repository, etc.)
> :
> :o   Submitted two or more patches to a UC governed repository over the
> last
> :six months
> :
> :·  Track chairs for OpenStack Summits
> :
> :o   Identified track chair for the upcoming OpenStack Summit (based on
> when
> :data is gathered) [this is a forward-facing metric]
> :
> :·  Contributors to Superuser (articles, interviews, user stories,
> etc.)
> :
> :o   Listed as author in at least one publication at
> superuser.openstack.org
> :over the last six months
> :
> :·  Submission for eligibility to AUC review panel
> :
> :o   No formal criteria, anyone can self-nominate, and nominations will be
> :reviewed per guidance established in milestone-5
> :
> :·  Active moderators on ask.openstack
> :
> :o   Listed as moderator on Ask OpenStack and have over 500 karma
> :
> :There is additional information available in the etherpad[1] the AUC
> :recognition WG has been using for this task which includes Q (question
> :and answers) between team members.
> :
> :[1] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/uc-recog-metrics
> :
> :--
> :Thanks,
> :Shamail Tahir
> :t: @ShamailXD
> :tz: Eastern Time
>
> :___
> :User-committee mailing list
> :user-commit...@lists.openstack.org
> :http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/user-committee
>
>
> --
>



-- 
Thanks,
Shamail Tahir
t: @ShamailXD
tz: Eastern Time
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] [recognition] AUC Recognition WG Meeting Today (6/30/16)

[Shamail Tahir]

Hi everyone,

The AUC (Active User Contributor) Recognition WG will be meeting today and
the agenda has been posted on our wiki[1].

Meeting information:
Date: 6/30
Time: 1900 UTC
IRC Channel: #openstack-meeting-3

[1] *https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/AUCRecognition#Meeting_Information
<https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/AUCRecognition#Meeting_Information>*

-- 
Thanks,
Shamail Tahir
t: @ShamailXD
tz: Eastern Time
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] Seeking feedback: Active User Contributor (AUC) eligibility requirements

[Shamail Tahir]

Hi everyone,

The AUC Recognition WG has been hard at work on milestone-4 of our plan
which is to identify the eligibility criteria for each community
contributor role that is covered by AUC.  We had a great mix of community
people involved in defining these thresholds but we wanted to also open
this up for broader community feedback before we propose them to the user
committee.  AUC is a new concept and we hope to make iterative improvements
going forward... you can consider the guidelines below as "version 1" and I
am certain they will evolve as lessons are learned.  Thank you in advance
for your feedback!

·  Official User Group organizers

o   Listed as an organizer or coordinator for an official OpenStack user
group

·  Active members of official UC Working Groups

o   Attend 25% of the IRC meetings and have spoken more than 25 times OR
have spoken more than 100 times regardless of attendance count over the
last six months

o   WG that do not use IRC for their meetings will depend on the meeting
chair(s) to identify active participation from attendees

·  Ops meetup moderators

o   Moderate a session at the operators meetup over the last six
months AND/OR

o   Host the operators meetup (limit 2 people from the hosting
organization) over the last six months

·  Contributions to any repository under UC governance (ops
repositories, user stories repository, etc.)

o   Submitted two or more patches to a UC governed repository over the last
six months

·  Track chairs for OpenStack Summits

o   Identified track chair for the upcoming OpenStack Summit (based on when
data is gathered) [this is a forward-facing metric]

·  Contributors to Superuser (articles, interviews, user stories, etc.)

o   Listed as author in at least one publication at superuser.openstack.org
over the last six months

·  Submission for eligibility to AUC review panel

o   No formal criteria, anyone can self-nominate, and nominations will be
reviewed per guidance established in milestone-5

·  Active moderators on ask.openstack

o   Listed as moderator on Ask OpenStack and have over 500 karma

There is additional information available in the etherpad[1] the AUC
recognition WG has been using for this task which includes Q (question
and answers) between team members.

[1] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/uc-recog-metrics

-- 
Thanks,
Shamail Tahir
t: @ShamailXD
tz: Eastern Time
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

Re: [Openstack-operators] Ops Tag Team meeting time

[Shamail]

Hi Devon,

> On Jun 23, 2016, at 10:22 AM, Devon Boatwright <devon.boatwri...@gmail.com> 
> wrote:
> 
> Hello,
> 
> I just want to verify the time for the Ops Tag Team meeting time. It says 
> every other Thursday at 1400UTC. Which I'm showing would be today at 10am 
> EDT. However, there is no meeting going on? Are these meetings still 
> happening? I see the logs for the last meeting were in March. 
Thanks for bringing up this topic. These meetings should still happen but I 
have not been able to reach out to people with reminders over the last few 
months.  I will start sending routine reminders again to ensure they pick up 
again.

We also need to fix the schedule on eavesdrop.  The ops-tags team usually meets 
only once a month (which is supposed to be every 3rd Thursday of the month) but 
this option can not be defined in eavesdrop, hence our schedule shows every 
other week.  

We can try to hold the meeting every couple of weeks so there is a set cadence 
going forward, although some agendas might be fairly light.

Thanks,
Shamail 
> 
> Thanks!
> -- 
> Devon Boatwright
> devon.boatwri...@gmail.com
> ___
> 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] [recognition] AUC Recognition WG Meeting Today (6/16/2016)

[Shamail Tahir]

Hi everyone,

The AUC (Active User Contributor) Recognition WG will be meeting today and
the agenda has been posted on our wiki[1].

Meeting information:
Date: 6/16
Time: 1900 UTC
IRC Channel: #openstack-meeting-3

[1] *https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/AUCRecognition#Meeting_Information
<https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/AUCRecognition#Meeting_Information>*

-- 
Thanks,
Shamail Tahir
t: @ShamailXD
tz: Eastern Time
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] [recognition] AUC Recognition WG Meeting Today (6/2/16)

[Shamail Tahir]

Hi everyone,

The AUC (Active User Contributor) Recognition WG will be meeting today and
the agenda has been posted on our wiki[1].

Meeting information:
Date: 6/2
Time: 1900 UTC
IRC Channel: #openstack-meeting-3

[1] *https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/AUCRecognition#Meeting_Information
<https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/AUCRecognition#Meeting_Information>*

-- 
Thanks,
Shamail Tahir
t: @ShamailXD
tz: Eastern Time
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] [recognition] Non-ATC Recognition WG Meeting Today (5/26/2016)

[Shamail Tahir]

Hi everyone,

The Non-ATC Recognition WG will be meeting today and the agenda has been
posted on our wiki[1].

Meeting information:
Date: 5/26
Time: 1900 UTC
IRC Channel: #openstack-meeting-3

[1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/NonATCRecognition#Meeting_Information

-- 
Thanks,
Shamail Tahir
t: @ShamailXD
tz: Eastern Time
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

Re: [Openstack-operators] [recognition] Non-ATC Recognition WG Meeting Today (5/12/2016)

[Shamail]

Thanks Edgar.  I look forward to the draft document!

> On May 20, 2016, at 11:27 AM, Edgar Magana <edgar.mag...@workday.com> wrote:
> 
> Hello Shamail and Team,
>  
> Thank you so much to clarify the current progress and the work in progress. 
> Please, keep the hard work. Next week the UC will share with you and the rest 
> of the WGs and Teams a document where we want to share with the board of 
> directors to have a better alignment as User Committee with the rest of the 
> OpenStack Governance. This is why I wanted to be sure we have a good set of 
> milestones to be completed for this team.
>  
> Thanks,
>  
> Edgar
>  
> From: Shamail <itzsham...@gmail.com>
> Date: Thursday, May 19, 2016 at 4:19 PM
> To: Edgar Magana <edgar.mag...@workday.com>
> Cc: "user-commit...@lists.openstack.org" 
> <user-commit...@lists.openstack.org>, 
> "openstack-operators@lists.openstack.org" 
> <openstack-operators@lists.openstack.org>
> Subject: Re: [Openstack-operators] [recognition] Non-ATC Recognition WG 
> Meeting Today (5/12/2016)
>  
> Hi Edgar,
> 
> On May 19, 2016, at 7:00 PM, Edgar Magana <edgar.mag...@workday.com> wrote:
> 
> Shamail and Team,
>  
> Where are we I defining the activities for recognizing OpenStack Users? In my 
> mind we have completed the definition and we agreed on:
> AUC – Active User Contributor
> We encourage the following activities:
> Organizers of any of the groups.openstack.org
> Active members and contributors to Functional Teams and/or Working Groups.
> Operators meet-up moderator
> Contributing to any repository under the UC governance (i.e. os-ops and user 
> stories)
> Track chairs for OpenStack Summits
> Contributors to superuser (articles, interviews, user stories, etc.)
> Active moderators on ask.openstack
> If all this make sense, Do we still need to have this WG?
>  
> We have agreed on the contributors for phase 1 of the user-committee 
> constituency and we are currently working on milestone-3 which is to define 
> the metrics (and methods used to collect metrics) associated with the given 
> activities.  
>  
> We have a few more milestones remaining[1] which concludes with us wrapping 
> up the findings and sharing them with the user committee.  
>  
> I think it still makes sense for the working group to exist (for now) since 
> we still need to formulate how we will capture the necessary metrics to 
> validate that an individual meets the requirements for one of the roles 
> mentioned by you.  We are also thinking about how to automate data collection 
> and possibly integrate these metrics with Stackalytics (longer term) to give 
> credit via that tool.
>  
> Please let me know if pursuing the remaining milestones make sense since we 
> started the WG to help meet objectives given to us by the user committee.
>  
> [1] 
> https://wiki.openstack.org/w/index.php?title=NonATCRecognition=toggle_view_desktop#Milestones
>  
> Thanks,
> Shamail 
> 
>  
> Thanks,
>  
> Edgar
>  
> From: Shamail <itzsham...@gmail.com>
> Date: Thursday, May 12, 2016 at 9:04 AM
> To: "user-commit...@lists.openstack.org" 
> <user-commit...@lists.openstack.org>, 
> "openstack-operators@lists.openstack.org"  
> <openstack-operators@lists.openstack.org>
> Subject: [Openstack-operators] [recognition] Non-ATC Recognition WG Meeting 
> Today (5/12/2016)
>  
> Hi everyone,
> 
> 
> 
> The Non-ATC Recognition WG will be meeting today and the agenda has been 
> posted on our wiki[1].  The team will be reviewing the results from working 
> session in Austin in today's meeting. 
> 
> 
> 
> Meeting information:
> Date: 5/12
> Time: 1900 UTC
> IRC Channel: #openstack-meeting-3
> 
> 
> 
> [1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/NonATCRecognition
>  
> Thank you,
> Shamail 
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

Re: [Openstack-operators] [recognition] Non-ATC Recognition WG Meeting Today (5/12/2016)

[Shamail]

Hi Edgar,

> On May 19, 2016, at 7:00 PM, Edgar Magana <edgar.mag...@workday.com> wrote:
> 
> Shamail and Team,
>  
> Where are we I defining the activities for recognizing OpenStack Users? In my 
> mind we have completed the definition and we agreed on:
> AUC – Active User Contributor
> We encourage the following activities:
> Organizers of any of the groups.openstack.org
> Active members and contributors to Functional Teams and/or Working Groups.
> Operators meet-up moderator
> Contributing to any repository under the UC governance (i.e. os-ops and user 
> stories)
> Track chairs for OpenStack Summits
> Contributors to superuser (articles, interviews, user stories, etc.)
> Active moderators on ask.openstack
> If all this make sense, Do we still need to have this WG?

We have agreed on the contributors for phase 1 of the user-committee 
constituency and we are currently working on milestone-3 which is to define the 
metrics (and methods used to collect metrics) associated with the given 
activities.  

We have a few more milestones remaining[1] which concludes with us wrapping up 
the findings and sharing them with the user committee.  

I think it still makes sense for the working group to exist (for now) since we 
still need to formulate how we will capture the necessary metrics to validate 
that an individual meets the requirements for one of the roles mentioned by 
you.  We are also thinking about how to automate data collection and possibly 
integrate these metrics with Stackalytics (longer term) to give credit via that 
tool.

Please let me know if pursuing the remaining milestones make sense since we 
started the WG to help meet objectives given to us by the user committee.

[1] 
https://wiki.openstack.org/w/index.php?title=NonATCRecognition=toggle_view_desktop#Milestones

Thanks,
Shamail 
>  
> Thanks,
>  
> Edgar
>  
> From: Shamail <itzsham...@gmail.com>
> Date: Thursday, May 12, 2016 at 9:04 AM
> To: "user-commit...@lists.openstack.org" 
> <user-commit...@lists.openstack.org>, 
> "openstack-operators@lists.openstack.org" 
> <openstack-operators@lists.openstack.org>
> Subject: [Openstack-operators] [recognition] Non-ATC Recognition WG Meeting 
> Today (5/12/2016)
>  
> Hi everyone,
> 
> 
> The Non-ATC Recognition WG will be meeting today and the agenda has been 
> posted on our wiki[1].  The team will be reviewing the results from working 
> session in Austin in today's meeting. 
> 
> 
> Meeting information:
> Date: 5/12
> Time: 1900 UTC
> IRC Channel: #openstack-meeting-3
> 
> 
> [1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/NonATCRecognition
>  
> Thank you,
> Shamail 
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] [recognition] Non-ATC Recognition WG Meeting Today (5/12/2016)

[Shamail]

Hi everyone,

The Non-ATC Recognition WG will be meeting today and the agenda has been posted 
on our wiki[1].  The team will be reviewing the results from working session in 
Austin in today's meeting. 

Meeting information:
Date: 5/12
Time: 1900 UTC
IRC Channel: #openstack-meeting-3

[1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/NonATCRecognition

Thank you,
Shamail ___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] Ops meetup: Ops tags working session

[Shamail]

Hello (again),

I wanted to let you know about another session happening at the ops meetup on 
Monday.

The ops tag team will be meeting for a double-header from 2:50-4:20P on Monday 
(4/25).  Come to the first half to learn about ops tags and work on processes 
associated with tag refresh. Come to the second half to brainstorm and propose 
new ops tags.  Ideally, stay for the whole session!

Etherpad:
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/AUS-ops-Ops-tags

Summit schedule link:
https://www.openstack.org/summit/austin-2016/summit-schedule/events/9523

Thanks,
Shamail 

___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] Ops meetup: Community-Generated Roadmap Feedback Session

[Shamail]

Hi everyone,

The product working group collaborates with projects teams to build a 
community-generated roadmap that covers the current release through N+2.  The 
contents are directional in nature to provide insights into strategic plans 
being made by the project teams, they are not firm commitments.  

We would like to share the most recent release at the ops meetup to get 
feedback on how the content could be changed to make it more valuable to you 
(since the operator community is one of the members of the primary audience for 
this document.)

The session will be on Monday at 12:05P CDT.  The etherpad contains all the 
necessary details along with some topics... please feel free to add more!

[1] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/AUS-ops-Roadmap-Feedback-Request-from-Ops

Thanks,
Shamail 
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] [tags] Meeting cancelled for 4/14 (see details for ops meetup session)

[Shamail Tahir]

Hi everyone,

The ops-tags team meeting will be cancelled for tomorrow since the team
will be meeting for a double session during the ops meetup at the OpenStack
Summit in Austin.  All are invited to participate and we look forward to
seeing you there!

Details:
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/AUS-ops-Ops-tags

-- 
Thanks,
Shamail Tahir
t: @ShamailXD
tz: Eastern Time
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

Re: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev] Telco Working Group meeting for Wednesday April 6th CANCELLED

[Shamail]

> On Apr 12, 2016, at 1:12 PM, Steve Gordon  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> - Original Message -
>> From: "Calum Loudon" 
>> To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" 
>> ,
>> "openstack-operators" 
>> Sent: Wednesday, April 6, 2016 6:09:16 AM
>> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] Telco Working Group meeting for Wednesday April 
>>6th CANCELLED
>> 
>> Thanks Steve
>> 
>> I agree with moving to the PWG.
>> 
>> On that topic, do you know what's happened to some of the user stories we
>> proposed, specifically https://review.openstack.org/#/c/290060/ and
>> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/290347/? Neither shows up in
>> https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack/openstack-user-stories
> 
> This query includes status:open, and those two reviews were merged already so 
> they don't show up.
> 
>> but there is a https://review.openstack.org/#/c/290991/ which seems to be a
>> copy of https://review.openstack.org/#/c/290060/ with the template help text
>> added back in and no mention of the original?
> 
> From Shamail's comment in 290991:
> 
>This change should be used to discuss and refine the concept. Can the user 
> story owner please make a minor change to show ownership?
> 
> Basically they opened new reviews with a minor change to trigger further 
> discussion. I'm not in love with this approach versus just discussing it on 
> the original move request but it is the way it is being done for now. W.r.t. 
> 290060 I believe you probably meant to include another link but I imagine the 
> situation is the same.
Yeah, unfortunately, this approach was needed when we changed the workflow.  A 
minor change would be recommended for now.  

The template recently changed and you could update the story to the new 
template (if it isn't already updated) and that would suffice.
> 
> -Steve

___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

Re: [Openstack-operators] [osops] Finding ways to get operator issues to projects - Starting with NOVA

[Shamail]

> On Apr 7, 2016, at 9:23 PM, Edgar Magana  wrote:
> 
> Hello,
> 
> I do agree that PWG should be the place for collecting product features 
> requirements and properly delivered to the project teams.  I am not sure how 
> to use OSOps for User Stories, any example of that?
The Enterprise WG and Telco WG are already submitting their user stories into 
the Product WG and we would be glad to welcome user stories from the Ops 
community as well!  

One way to use OSOps might be to copy the template[1] from the product working 
group and collaborate with other operators to refine the user story, however I 
would still encourage eventual submission to the product working group 
repository.  This would help us ensure that user stories from multiple sources 
are available in a common area.  

If you would like to learn more about the Product Working Group then the birds 
of a feather session[2] at the summit will be a great one to join!  I echo what 
Kenny said, we would love user stories from OpenStack operators!

[1] 
https://github.com/openstack/openstack-user-stories/blob/master/user-story-template.rst
[2] https://www.openstack.org/summit/austin-2016/summit-schedule/events/9041
> 
> Edgar
> 
> From: Joseph Bajin 
> Date: Wednesday, April 6, 2016 at 5:50 AM
> To: Kenny Johnston 
> Cc: OpenStack Operators 
> Subject: Re: [Openstack-operators] [osops] Finding ways to get operator 
> issues to projects - Starting with NOVA
> 
> This is great Kenny!  
> 
> I will see about attending one of the PWG sessions in the next few weeks.  
> 
> What I was thinking and maybe this works or doesn't was to have the "OSOps" 
> group be that central point where Operators could feed User Stories.   I was 
> thinking that this may make it easier for groups to see all the Operators 
> requests, User Stories, complaints, appreciations, etc in one central 
> location.  That way if someone didn't know that there was say Product Work 
> Group, they at least could get their story down for others to see. 
> 
> 
> 
>> On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 2:25 PM, Kenny Johnston  
>> wrote:
>> I'll throw this out there but the Product Work Group[1] has a place for 
>> submitting "User Stories"[2] which are meant to be robust descriptions of 
>> problem statements and use cases. Speaking as a core PWG team member, I can 
>> say we'd love to have operators submit User Stories with whatever level of 
>> detail they have available so our Product Team can help iterate and flesh 
>> out the stories for consideration by project teams.
>> 
>> You can find the PWG team in #openstack-product or in the PWG Mailling 
>> list[3]
>> 
>> [1]https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/ProductTeam
>> [2]https://github.com/openstack/openstack-user-stories
>> [3]http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/product-wg
>> 
>>> On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 12:29 PM, Joseph Bajin  wrote:
>>> Hi Christoph, 
>>> 
>>> This is a great idea and a tool I think others would be very interested in 
>>> having. 
>>> 
>>> Now the question that I have to you and everyone else, is within the 
>>> Operators community how would we capture this information so we could open 
>>> up dialogue with both the Neutron and Nova teams?
>>> 
>>> --Joe
>>> 
 On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 11:43 AM, Christoph Andreas Torlinsky 
  wrote:
 Hi Joseph, we would propose a migration tool for getting the NOVA 
 networking database information into mapping it Neutron,
 as we are seeing an increasing demand to "upgrade" from Nova Networking to 
 an OpenStack Neutron and SDN 3rd Party based
 model for Cloud Computing amongst our installed base of OpenStack 
 customers, some of whom grew out of Nova networking and it's
 limits in leveraging VLANs.
 
 I also caught sight of the recent write ups here , which seem to point in 
 the same direction actually, in lieu of adoption of Liberty from
 older release:
 
 http://docs.openstack.org/liberty/networking-guide/migration-nova-network-to-neutron.html
 
 Any tooling to make this easier as a migration process, we (me) are keen 
 to engage and help, 
 
 Let us know if anyone else is on the same level working on things,
 
 c
 
 
 Christoph Andreas Torlinski
 +44(0)7872413856 UK Mobile
 christ...@nuagenetworks.net
 
 On 26 March 2016 at 20:47, Joseph Bajin  wrote:
> Operators, 
> 
> At the last OSOps Tools and Monitoring meeting, we had mriedem (Nova 
> Team) talk with us about a proposal that they are working on. The Nova 
> team would like to abandon the use of a wish-list as it has grown to an 
> unmanageable size.  They have posted a few times to both the operators 
> list [1] as well as the developers list [2] about their idea.  They 

Re: [Openstack-operators] [User-committee] Announcing the Non-ATC Recognition Working Group

[Shamail Tahir]

Hi Rocky,

The plan is to start the meeting next week.  I created the poll so that
people can pick days of the week and times that will work best for them.  I
apologize for any confusion caused by the dates, the meeting will actually
start *next week* and will be scheduled for the best day/time.  I hope this
helps!

Thanks,
Shamail

On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 8:30 PM, Rochelle Grober <rochelle.gro...@huawei.com
> wrote:

> Left a comment on the doodle.
>
>
>
> Could you double-check the dates?  Most of the days and times listed are
> already past.
>
>
>
> --Rocky
>
>
>
> *From:* Shamail Tahir [mailto:itzsham...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, March 30, 2016 10:36 AM
> *To:* openstack-operators; commun...@lists.openstack.org;
> user-commit...@lists.openstack.org
> *Subject:* Re: [User-committee] Announcing the Non-ATC Recognition
> Working Group
>
>
>
> Hi everyone,
>
>
>
> Friendly reminder:  The doodle poll[1] for the Non-ATC recognition WG
> meeting time will be closing at March 31st, 2100 UTC (tomorrow).
>
>
>
> Please vote if you plan to join us!
>
>
>
> [1] http://doodle.com/poll/7r5khrefyx7wysi4
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Shamail
>
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 28, 2016 at 3:33 PM, Shamail Tahir <itzsham...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Hi everyone,
>
>
>
> We had some great discussion on the mailing lists on how to recognize
> operators and other contributors in the OpenStack community who don't
> qualify for ATC (Active Technical Contributor) status earlier this
> month[1].  We revisited this topic at the last User Committee meeting[2]
> and decided to start a short-term working group with one objective: to help
> define the User Committee constituency.  This will help us determine who
> should be included in the {not yet named} contributor program by the User
> Committee and how to qualify.
>
>
>
> Maish and I volunteered to help start the conversations, document the
> decisions, and provide updates on the outcome to the User Committee.  We
> have created a wiki[3] for this new working group (which will be disbanded
> once we have reached our objective) and there is an active doodle poll[4]
> to determine the time for our weekly meeting, which will be held in an IRC
> channel.  The poll shows the start dates as this week but the please just
> vote for the day/time (not date) since we will not begin our meeting until
> next week (week of 4/4).
>
>
>
> Please volunteer if you want to help us develop the membership definition
> for this new designation.  The user committee will have a lot more work
> ahead of them to fully build out a new charter and/or program but this
> activity will be extremely helpful as a foundational building block.
>
>
>
> [1] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/community/2016-March/001422.html
>
> [2]
> http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/uc/2016/uc.2016-03-14-19.00.log.html
>
> [3] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/NonATCRecognition
>
> [4] http://doodle.com/poll/7r5khrefyx7wysi4
>
>
>
> --
>
> Thanks,
>
> Shamail Tahir
>
> t: @ShamailXD
>
> tz: Eastern Time
>
>
>



-- 
Thanks,
Shamail Tahir
t: @ShamailXD
tz: Eastern Time
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

Re: [Openstack-operators] Announcing the Non-ATC Recognition Working Group

[Shamail Tahir]

Hi everyone,

Friendly reminder:  The doodle poll[1] for the Non-ATC recognition WG
meeting time will be closing at March 31st, 2100 UTC (tomorrow).

Please vote if you plan to join us!

[1] http://doodle.com/poll/7r5khrefyx7wysi4

Thanks,
Shamail

On Mon, Mar 28, 2016 at 3:33 PM, Shamail Tahir <itzsham...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
> We had some great discussion on the mailing lists on how to recognize
> operators and other contributors in the OpenStack community who don't
> qualify for ATC (Active Technical Contributor) status earlier this
> month[1].  We revisited this topic at the last User Committee meeting[2]
> and decided to start a short-term working group with one objective: to help
> define the User Committee constituency.  This will help us determine who
> should be included in the {not yet named} contributor program by the User
> Committee and how to qualify.
>
> Maish and I volunteered to help start the conversations, document the
> decisions, and provide updates on the outcome to the User Committee.  We
> have created a wiki[3] for this new working group (which will be disbanded
> once we have reached our objective) and there is an active doodle poll[4]
> to determine the time for our weekly meeting, which will be held in an IRC
> channel.  The poll shows the start dates as this week but the please just
> vote for the day/time (not date) since we will not begin our meeting until
> next week (week of 4/4).
>
> Please volunteer if you want to help us develop the membership definition
> for this new designation.  The user committee will have a lot more work
> ahead of them to fully build out a new charter and/or program but this
> activity will be extremely helpful as a foundational building block.
>
> [1] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/community/2016-March/001422.html
> [2]
> http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/uc/2016/uc.2016-03-14-19.00.log.html
> [3] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/NonATCRecognition
> [4] http://doodle.com/poll/7r5khrefyx7wysi4
>
> --
> Thanks,
> Shamail Tahir
> t: @ShamailXD
> tz: Eastern Time
>
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] Announcing the Non-ATC Recognition Working Group

[Shamail Tahir]

Hi everyone,

We had some great discussion on the mailing lists on how to recognize
operators and other contributors in the OpenStack community who don't
qualify for ATC (Active Technical Contributor) status earlier this
month[1].  We revisited this topic at the last User Committee meeting[2]
and decided to start a short-term working group with one objective: to help
define the User Committee constituency.  This will help us determine who
should be included in the {not yet named} contributor program by the User
Committee and how to qualify.

Maish and I volunteered to help start the conversations, document the
decisions, and provide updates on the outcome to the User Committee.  We
have created a wiki[3] for this new working group (which will be disbanded
once we have reached our objective) and there is an active doodle poll[4]
to determine the time for our weekly meeting, which will be held in an IRC
channel.  The poll shows the start dates as this week but the please just
vote for the day/time (not date) since we will not begin our meeting until
next week (week of 4/4).

Please volunteer if you want to help us develop the membership definition
for this new designation.  The user committee will have a lot more work
ahead of them to fully build out a new charter and/or program but this
activity will be extremely helpful as a foundational building block.

[1] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/community/2016-March/001422.html
[2]
http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/uc/2016/uc.2016-03-14-19.00.log.html
[3] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/NonATCRecognition
[4] http://doodle.com/poll/7r5khrefyx7wysi4

-- 
Thanks,
Shamail Tahir
t: @ShamailXD
tz: Eastern Time
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

Re: [Openstack-operators] [tags] Appealing for change of tags

[Shamail Tahir]

Hi,

We could definitely use more attendance/help on the ops-tag team... The
data in project navigator comes from multiple sources but the install guide
availability[1], packages[2], etc. are derived from ops-tags[3].  The team
meets once a month (3rd Thursday of every month) to review open tags.  I
agree with Tim that we should determine how we can automate the information
collection as much as possible... It's not abandoned but more participation
would be helpful.  We are nearing the point where we should start
populating tags for Mitaka.

[1]
https://github.com/openstack/ops-tags-team/blob/master/liberty/ops-docs-install-guide.json
[2]
https://github.com/openstack/ops-tags-team/blob/master/liberty/ops-packaged.json
[3] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Operations/Tags

Thanks,
Shamail


On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 12:12 AM, Hauke Bruno Wollentin <
hauke-bruno.wollen...@innovo-cloud.de> wrote:

> fullack with both of you. The project guide itself is an awesome idea but
> don't know why, it looks a bit abandoned for now. Would be great if someone
> - maybe from the cross project team(?) - could point out how we all could
> make things better (or even who the right person to talk to is ;)).
>
> just my 2 cents,
> cheers,
> hauke
>
>
> *From:* Gal Sagie <gal.sa...@gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Mar 23, 2016 11:00 AM
> *To:* Tim Bell
> *Cc:* openstack-operators
> *Subject:* Re: [Openstack-operators] [tags] Appealing for change of tags
>
> The projects themselves don't seems updated, there are other projects in
> the big-tent that are not
> listed there yet.
>
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 9:16 PM, Tim Bell <tim.b...@cern.ch> wrote:
>
>>
>> Looking at projects like Barbican in the
>> https://www.openstack.org/software/releases/liberty/components/barbican,
>> they seem to have met some conditions which are currently marked as ‘no’.
>>
>> What is the mechanism to query these settings (either manual or
>> automatic) ?
>>
>> As an example, there is significant documentation for Barbican at
>> http://docs.openstack.org/developer/barbican/ but it is marked as ‘no’
>> in the page for
>> https://www.openstack.org/software/releases/liberty/components/barbican  Is
>> there an install guide for this project guide (at docs.openstack.org)?
>>
>> How about adding
>>
>>- some algorithmic description (i.e. automatic or manual) for the
>>selection ? If automatic, the algorithm could be provided so the project
>>knows what to do
>>- a process description for the manual cases for projects to ask for
>>a re-classification
>>
>> Tim
>>
>>
>> ___
>> OpenStack-operators mailing list
>> OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Best Regards ,
>
> The G.
>
> ___
> OpenStack-operators mailing list
> OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
>
>


-- 
Thanks,
Shamail Tahir
t: @ShamailXD
tz: Eastern Time
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

Re: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev] OpenStack Contributor Awards

[Shamail]

> On Mar 1, 2016, at 10:40 AM, Matt Jarvis  
> wrote:
> 
> +1 for custom T-shirts or hoodies. Actual medals/trophies would also be a 
> nice idea ;)
+1
> 
>> On 1 March 2016 at 15:30, Tom Fifield  wrote:
>> Excellent, excellent.
>> 
>> What's the best place to buy Raspberry Pis these days?
>> 
>>> On 22/02/16 21:09, Victoria Martínez de la Cruz wrote:
>>> Oh I missed this thread... really great initiative! It's time to
>>> recognize the effort of our fellow stackers :D
>>> 
>>> Raspi/Arduino kits or limited edition t-shirts are very cool goodies
>>> 
>>> Cheers,
>>> 
>>> V
>>> 
>>> 2016-02-22 0:21 GMT-03:00 Steve Martinelli >> >:
>>> 
>>> limited edition (and hilarious) t-shirts are always fun :)
>>> 
>>> ++ on raspberry pis, those are always a hit.
>>> 
>>> stevemar
>>> 
>>> Inactive hide details for Hugh Blemings ---2016/02/21 09:54:59
>>> PM---Hiya, On 16/02/2016 21:43, Tom Fifield wrote:Hugh Blemings
>>> ---2016/02/21 09:54:59 PM---Hiya, On 16/02/2016 21:43, Tom Fifield
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> From: Hugh Blemings >
>>> To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)"
>>> >> >, OpenStack Operators
>>> >> >
>>> Date: 2016/02/21 09:54 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] OpenStack Contributor Awards
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Hiya,
>>> 
>>> On 16/02/2016 21:43, Tom Fifield wrote:
>>>  > Hi all,
>>>  >
>>>  > I'd like to introduce a new round of community awards handed out
>>> by the
>>>  > Foundation, to be presented at the feedback session of the summit.
>>>  >
>>>  > Nothing flashy or starchy - the idea is that these are to be a little
>>>  > informal, quirky ... but still recognising the extremely valuable
>>> work
>>>  > that we all do to make OpenStack excel.
>>>  >
>>>  > [...]
>>>  >
>>>  > in the meantime, let's use this thread to discuss the fun part:
>>> goodies.
>>>  > What do you think we should lavish award winners with? Soft toys?
>>>  > Perpetual trophies? baseball caps ?
>>> 
>>> I can't help but think that given the scale of a typical OpenStack
>>> deployment and the desire for these awards to be a bit quirky, giving
>>> recipients something at the other end of the computing scale - an
>>> Arduino, or cluster of Raspberry Pis or similar could be kinda fun :)
>>> 
>>> Cheers,
>>> Hugh
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> __
>>> 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-operators mailing list
>> OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
> 
> 
> DataCentred Limited registered in England and Wales no. 05611763
> ___
> 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] [tags] Ops-Tag Meeting

[Shamail]

Hi everyone,

The Ops-Tag[1] team will be meeting tomorrow (2/18) at 1400 UTC in 
#openstack-meeting.  The agenda is included below, we hope to see you there!

Agenda:
1) Review proposed tags/changes
2) Open

[1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Operations/Tags

Thanks,
Shamail 
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

Re: [Openstack-operators] Draft Agenda for MAN Ops Meetup (Feb 15, 16)

[Shamail Tahir]

Hi Matt,


On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 3:47 AM, Matt Jarvis <matt.jar...@datacentred.co.uk>
wrote:

> Hello All
>
> The event in Manchester is rapidly approaching, and we're still looking
> for moderators and presenters for some of these sessions. If you proposed
> one of the sessions currently in the schedule, please let us know so we can
> assign you in the schedule. If you'd be willing to help out and moderate
> one or more sessions, we'd really appreciate your help. Thanks to everyone
> who's volunteered so far !
>
How can we identify which sessions are missing moderators currently?

>
> On 20 January 2016 at 17:54, Tom Fifield <t...@openstack.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Matt, Nick and myself took some time to take our suggestions from the
>> etherpad and attempted to wrangle them into something that would fit in the
>> space we have over 2 days.
>>
>> As a reminder, we have two different kind of sessions - General Sessions,
>> which are discussions for the operator community aimed to produce
>> actions (eg best practices, feedback on badness), and Working groups focus
>> on specific topics aiming to make concrete progress on tasks in that
>> area.
>>
>> As always, some stuff has been munged and mangled in an attempt to fit it
>> in so please take a look at the below and reply with your comments! Is
>> anything missing? Something look like a terrible idea? Want to completely
>> change the room layout? There's still a little bit of flexibility at this
>> stage.
>>
>>
>> Day 1 Room 1
>> Room 2
>> Room 3
>> 9:00 - 10:00 Registration
>>
>> 10:00 - 10:30 Introduction + History of Ops Meetups + Intro to working
>> groups
>>
>> 10:30 - 11:15 How to engage with the community
>>
>> 11:15 - 11:20 Breakout explanation
>>
>> 11:20 - 12:00 Tokyo highlights Keystone and Federation
>> 12:00 - 13:30 Lunch
>>
>> 13:30 - 14:10 Upgrade challenges, LTS releases, patches and packaging 
>> Experience
>> with Puppet Deployments HPC / Scientific WG
>> 14:10 - 14:50 Upgrade challenges, LTS releases, patches and packaging 
>> Post-Puppet
>> deployment patterns HPC / Scientific WG
>> 14:50 - 15:20 Coffee
>>
>> 15:20 - 16:00 Neutron Operational best practices HA at the Hypervisor
>> level
>> 16:00 - 16:40 OSOps - what is it, where is it going, what you can do 
>> OpenStack
>> Ansible Project Update
>> 16:40 - 17:00 Breakout Reports
>>
>> 17:00 - 18:00 Arch Show and Tell
>>
>> 18.00 - Drinks and pizza event
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Day 2 Room 1
>> Room 2
>> Room 3
>> 9:00 - 09:45 UX priorities for development - what's broken for you ?
>> GUI, CLI, API
>>
>> 9:45 - 10:30 Integrations - billing, signups
>>
>> 10:30 - 11:15 Nova status (including live upgrade etc.) Ceph integration
>> 11:15 - 11:30 Coffee
>>
>> 11:30 - 11:35 Breakout explanation
>>
>> 11:35 - 12:20 Live migration status User stories writing
>> 12:20 - 13:30 Lunch
>>
>> 13:30 - 14:15 Containers - who and how OSOPs - working session Large
>> Deployment Team
>> 14:15 - 15:00 Project Kuryr - container networking in Neutron Monitoring
>> and Tools WG Large Deployment Team
>> 15:00 - 15:30 Coffee
>>
>> 15:30 - 16:00 Breakout Reports
>>
>> 16:00 - 17:00 Feedback Session
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> There will be a followup email shortly regarding moderators for the
>> sessions - thanks to those who volunteered so far!
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>>
>> Tom
>>
>> ___
>> OpenStack-operators mailing list
>> OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Matt Jarvis
> Head of Cloud Computing
> DataCentred
> Office: (+44)0161 8703985
> Mobile: (+44)07983 725372
> Email: matt.jar...@datacentred.co.uk
> Website: http://www.datacentred.co.uk
>
> DataCentred Limited registered in England and Wales no. 05611763
> ___
> OpenStack-operators mailing list
> OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
>
>


-- 
Thanks,
Shamail Tahir
t: @ShamailXD
tz: Eastern Time
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

Re: [Openstack-operators] Draft Agenda for MAN Ops Meetup (Feb 15, 16)

[Shamail Tahir]

Thanks Matt!

On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 4:29 AM, Matt Jarvis <matt.jar...@datacentred.co.uk>
wrote:

> That's a very good point !
>
> OK, so the ones we definitely don't seem to have anyone moderating or
> presenting against currently are :
>
> Tokyo Highlights - going to assume this was a talk
>
I can help with this one.

> Keystone Federation - discussion session
> Post-Puppet deployment patterns - discussion
> HA at the Hypervisor level - assume this was a talk too
> Ceph integration - discussion
> Writing User Stories - working group
>
I'll be glad to help with this one as well.

> OSOps - what is it, where is it going, what you can do
> OSOps working session
> Monitoring and Tools WG
>
> These were almost all taken from the original etherpad (
> https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/MAN-ops-meetup ), so if you suggested
> them or would like to present/moderate then let us know.
>
> If you would like to help with moderating any of the other sessions apart
> from those above, let us know - for most of the sessions we can always use
> two moderators.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 1 February 2016 at 09:20, Shamail Tahir <itzsham...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Matt,
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 3:47 AM, Matt Jarvis <
>> matt.jar...@datacentred.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello All
>>>
>>> The event in Manchester is rapidly approaching, and we're still looking
>>> for moderators and presenters for some of these sessions. If you proposed
>>> one of the sessions currently in the schedule, please let us know so we can
>>> assign you in the schedule. If you'd be willing to help out and moderate
>>> one or more sessions, we'd really appreciate your help. Thanks to everyone
>>> who's volunteered so far !
>>>
>> How can we identify which sessions are missing moderators currently?
>>
>>>
>>> On 20 January 2016 at 17:54, Tom Fifield <t...@openstack.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> Matt, Nick and myself took some time to take our suggestions from the
>>>> etherpad and attempted to wrangle them into something that would fit in the
>>>> space we have over 2 days.
>>>>
>>>> As a reminder, we have two different kind of sessions - General
>>>> Sessions, which are discussions for the operator community aimed to
>>>> produce actions (eg best practices, feedback on badness), and Working
>>>> groups focus on specific topics aiming to make concrete progress on
>>>> tasks in that area.
>>>>
>>>> As always, some stuff has been munged and mangled in an attempt to fit
>>>> it in so please take a look at the below and reply with your comments! Is
>>>> anything missing? Something look like a terrible idea? Want to completely
>>>> change the room layout? There's still a little bit of flexibility at this
>>>> stage.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Day 1 Room 1
>>>> Room 2
>>>> Room 3
>>>> 9:00 - 10:00 Registration
>>>>
>>>> 10:00 - 10:30 Introduction + History of Ops Meetups + Intro to working
>>>> groups
>>>>
>>>> 10:30 - 11:15 How to engage with the community
>>>>
>>>> 11:15 - 11:20 Breakout explanation
>>>>
>>>> 11:20 - 12:00 Tokyo highlights Keystone and Federation
>>>> 12:00 - 13:30 Lunch
>>>>
>>>> 13:30 - 14:10 Upgrade challenges, LTS releases, patches and packaging 
>>>> Experience
>>>> with Puppet Deployments HPC / Scientific WG
>>>> 14:10 - 14:50 Upgrade challenges, LTS releases, patches and packaging 
>>>> Post-Puppet
>>>> deployment patterns HPC / Scientific WG
>>>> 14:50 - 15:20 Coffee
>>>>
>>>> 15:20 - 16:00 Neutron Operational best practices HA at the Hypervisor
>>>> level
>>>> 16:00 - 16:40 OSOps - what is it, where is it going, what you can do 
>>>> OpenStack
>>>> Ansible Project Update
>>>> 16:40 - 17:00 Breakout Reports
>>>>
>>>> 17:00 - 18:00 Arch Show and Tell
>>>>
>>>> 18.00 - Drinks and pizza event
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Day 2 Room 1
>>>> Room 2
>>>> Room 3
>>>> 9:00 - 09:45 UX priorities for development - what's broken for you ?
>>>> GUI, CLI, API
>>>>
>>>> 9:45 - 10:30 Integrations - billing, signups
>

Re: [Openstack-operators] OPs Midcycle location discussion.

[Shamail Tahir]

Hi everyone,

The Product WG is finalizing our mid-cycle plans and I wanted to confirm
the conclusion of this thread to bring into that discussion...

Reviewing the numerous responses here, it seems like the majority opted for
option #1 (one 'official' ops mid-cycle but not precluding regional ones)
and, in this specific instance, the 'official' one is the one happening in
Manchester.  Would you agree with this summary?

If we want to attempt a hub/spoke model (e.g. start etherpad-based
conversations at the 'official' mid-cycle but continue to build on those
topics at the regional events) then we can also discuss ideas on how to
help with the effort of summarizing discussions and topics.

Thanks,
Shamail


On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 4:36 PM, Clayton O'Neill <clay...@oneill.net> wrote:

> On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 4:24 PM, Erik McCormick <
> emccorm...@cirrusseven.com> wrote:
>
>> > 2) More technically we'll need to address the challenge of local
>> > sound, how to we ensure all the mostly spontaious talk in a large work
>> > session makes it to remote participants.  Passing a mic is a bit
>> > cumbersome and hard to enforce, while mic'ing the room to properly get
>> > ambient sound isn't likely something we can do without significant
>> > professional help.
>> >
>>
>> This is a technical issue that needs dealing with for sure. Passing a
>> mic is absolutely not practical, so it would need to be some sort of
>> ambient thing. We can't even get people to consistently go to a mic
>> during Q at the end of summit presentations. I've seen enough
>> teleconferencing systems that cover large boardroom settings to know
>> that such things exist, but I have no specific knowledge of what they
>> are, if they can be rented, or how much they cost. That will require a
>> lot of digging into.
>
>
> A key difference between the Ceph summit and the Ops Mid-cycle appears to
> be that the Ops Mid-cycle is at least an order of magnitude bigger.
>
> For a good amount of the Philly and Palo Alto mid-cycles there were 200ish
> people in a single room.  Audio was a problem even for people sitting in
> the room at times.   I think this is beyond “large boardroom” size.
>
> ___
> OpenStack-operators mailing list
> OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
>
>


-- 
Thanks,
Shamail Tahir
t: @ShamailXD
tz: Eastern Time
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

Re: [Openstack-operators] [Product] [nfv][telco][product] Future of telco working group and weekly meeting reminder

[Shamail]

Hi Steve,

> On Nov 18, 2015, at 6:39 AM, Steve Gordon  wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> Back in Vancouver [1] we began discussing the growing overlap between OPNFV 
> requirements projects and the current mission of the telco working group. 
> During this period the product working group, also in part focused on 
> recording and prioritizing user stories, has also been hitting its straps. As 
> we have recently lost a couple of core members of the telco working group 
> particularly on the technical side due to role changes etc. I think it is 
> time to roll its activities into these efforts.
> 
> With that in mind I would like to propose:
> 
> * Submitting the existing telcowg-usecases to the openstack-user-stories 
> repository
> * Engaging within the product working group (assuming they will have us ;)) 
> as owners of these user stories
This is a very similar model to what the enterprise WG did recently as well.  
Please let me know if I can do anything to help with the transition of the user 
stories.  
> 
> There is of course still a need to actually *implement* the requirements 
> exposed by these user stories but I am hopeful that together we can work 
> through a common process for this rather than continuing to attack it 
> separately. I would personally still like to see greater direct engagement 
> from service providers, but it seems like OPNFV and/or the OpenStack User 
> Committee [2] itself might be the right place for this going forward.
> 
> I'd like to discuss this proposal further in the weekly meeting. This week's 
> Telco Working Group meeting is scheduled for Wednesday the 18th at 1400 UTC. 
> As always the agenda etherpad is here:
> 
>   https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/nfv-meeting-agenda
Would it make sense for someone else (besides yourself :)) from the Product WG 
to join this session for Q as well? 
> 
> Thanks all!
> 
> Steve
> 
> [1] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/YVR-ops-telco
> [2] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/UserCommittee
> 
> ___
> Product-wg mailing list
> product...@lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/product-wg

___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] [tags] recurring meetings

[Shamail Tahir]

Hi everyone,

Per our conversation at the summit, the ops-tags team will now start
holding regular meetings with the hopes of increasing participation and/or
number of reviews.  The team will meet the second Thursday of every month
(starting with Nov. 12th).  I will send out a call for agenda items at the
beginning of every week that we have a team meeting.

Please log in and review outstanding tags at your convenience:
https://review.openstack.org/#/q/project:openstack/ops-tags-team,n,z

Meetings slots are every second Thursday at 1400 UTC in #openstack-meeting
on freenode (
http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?iso=20150702T1400)

-- 
Thanks,
Shamail Tahir
t: @ShamailXD
tz: Eastern Time
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

Re: [Openstack-operators] [tags] recurring meetings

[Shamail]

Will add it tonight.  Thanks!

> On Nov 3, 2015, at 6:49 PM, Tony Breeds <t...@bakeyournoodle.com> wrote:
> 
>> On Tue, Nov 03, 2015 at 03:49:14PM -0500, Shamail Tahir wrote:
>> Hi everyone,
>> 
>> Per our conversation at the summit, the ops-tags team will now start
>> holding regular meetings with the hopes of increasing participation and/or
>> number of reviews.  The team will meet the second Thursday of every month
>> (starting with Nov. 12th).  I will send out a call for agenda items at the
>> beginning of every week that we have a team meeting.
>> 
>> Please log in and review outstanding tags at your convenience:
>> https://review.openstack.org/#/q/project:openstack/ops-tags-team,n,z
>> 
>> Meetings slots are every second Thursday at 1400 UTC in #openstack-meeting
>> on freenode (
>> http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?iso=20150702T1400)
> 
> Care to add a entry in openstack-infra/irc-meetings ?  If the format isn't
> clear I'm happy to help get it right.
> 
> Yours Tony.

___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] Ops Working Session: Navigating the big tent (ops-tags team)

[Shamail]

Hi everyone,

I wanted to share details about another working session with you.

The ops-tags team is having a working session in Tokyo to discuss plans for 
proposed ops tags, getting new proposals, and determine next steps.  The 
session will also include a very brief introduction to the team and its 
objective.  Please join us as we discuss ops-tags and get involved by 
proposing/reviewing potential ops-tags.

In general, ops-tags are non-binary tags (binary tags fall under the governance 
of TC) and are created to help us understand interesting dimensions about 
projects in regards to operating/consuming them.

Date/Time: Tuesday (Oct. 27th) at 3:40pm
Session details: http://sched.co/4Nkq
Etherpad: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/TYO-ops-ops-tags-team

Related Bonus Material:
Message from Mark Collier regarding tags visualization can be found here: 
http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-tc/2015-October/001031.html

-- 
Thanks,
Shamail Tahir
t: @ShamailXD
tz: Eastern Time
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

Re: [Openstack-operators] [Large Deployments Team][Tags] Ops Tag for "Scale"

[Shamail Tahir]

On Sat, Sep 26, 2015 at 8:19 PM, Boris Pavlovic <bpavlo...@mirantis.com>
wrote:

> Shamail,
>
> It's really quite hard thing to standardize because there are few
> dimensions:
> - Amount of resources (VMs, Volumes, Images, ... of service),
> - Amount of active users (how ofter resource are created/deleted),
> - Size of cloud (amount of nodes)
> - Cloud deployment architecture
> - ...
>
> What I believe is that we should standardize:
>
> - Amount of  resource per service per node
> - Typical sizes of cloud: 10, 20, 50, 100, ... nodes
> - Workloads that we should be run:
>For example In Rally team we are trying to standardize them here:
>https://github.com/openstack/rally/tree/master/certification/openstack
> - Deployment Reference Architecture
> - Somebody should find enough resources to run at least for each release
>   those tests on real hardware
>

+1, the intention of this email was to get the initial criteria used by the
LDT team to qualify a "large deployment".

We will need to factor in the dimensions as well as establishing a baseline
RA/testing criteria for validation eventually.  Do you think that we should
bring up the "test scale on real HW" with the OpenStack Innovation Center
(OSIC) team since they will have multiple clusters running with 1K nodes
eventually?  I think Clint's reply ties in well with yours (establish
tests, deployment model for testing, and benchmark workloads).

>
> And create depending on this few scale tags:
> works-on-X-scale
>
>
> Best regards,
> Boris Pavlovic
>
> On Sat, Sep 26, 2015 at 11:40 AM, Shamail <itzsham...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Large Deployments Team,
>>
>> The ops-tags team was brainstorming potential future tags at our last
>> meeting and one topic of interest was to express the "scale" a service can
>> operate at via tags.
>>
>> Scale, of course, can imply several different dimensions (not to mention
>> test types).  We figured who better to talk to about the definition of
>> scale than the large deployment team.  :-)
>>
>> Can you please help us understand how your team classifies a deployment
>> as being large?  I recall that, in the initial discussions, LDT was using
>> the number of nodes.  Is this still the case?  Does large deployment factor
>> in things such as throughout requirements, number of networks, number of
>> volumes, etc. when deciding if a deployment is "large"?
>>
>> Thanks in advance for your help.  If it makes more sense to discuss this
>> topic at the next LDT meeting then I would be glad to join.
>>
>> Thank you,
>> Shamail Tahir
>> t: @ShamailXD
>> tz: EST
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> OpenStack-operators mailing list
>> OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
>>
>
>


-- 
Thanks,
Shamail Tahir
t: @ShamailXD
tz: Eastern Time
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

Re: [Openstack-operators] [Large Deployments Team][Tags] Ops Tag for "Scale"

[Shamail Tahir]

On Sat, Sep 26, 2015 at 8:10 PM, Clint Byrum <cl...@fewbar.com> wrote:

> Excerpts from Shamail's message of 2015-09-26 11:40:17 -0700:
> > Hi Large Deployments Team,
> >
> > The ops-tags team was brainstorming potential future tags at our last
> meeting and one topic of interest was to express the "scale" a service can
> operate at via tags.
> >
> > Scale, of course, can imply several different dimensions (not to mention
> test types).  We figured who better to talk to about the definition of
> scale than the large deployment team.  :-)
> >
> > Can you please help us understand how your team classifies a deployment
> as being large?  I recall that, in the initial discussions, LDT was using
> the number of nodes.  Is this still the case?  Does large deployment factor
> in things such as throughout requirements, number of networks, number of
> volumes, etc. when deciding if a deployment is "large"?
> >
> > Thanks in advance for your help.  If it makes more sense to discuss this
> topic at the next LDT meeting then I would be glad to join.
>
> I wasn't involved with the discussion, but I think it is an important one.
>
> IMO, the objective way to do this is to add tests for scaling factors,
> like ensuring reasonable resource cost per operation, response time during
> simulated high concurrency, and actual large scale 3rd-party CI. If a
> project hasn't done that, they shouldn't be considered "high scale".
>

I think these are all good suggestions, as a starting point though, our
thought process was that maybe we could use the same criteria as LDT.
Let's say (as an example) that a deployment that is considered a "large
deployment" is using a project then we could then say the project has been
known to achieve "scale".  With this method, we are inferring scale based
on real world deployments rather than establishing it via testing.  I think
both views (testing criteria for scale along with real-world data) probably
have a part to play in the longer term scope of the tag.  Will definitely
factor in your suggestions in the tag description though even if its a
future objective.

>
> (note that I don't think any of the projects actually has these things
> surfaced upstream, but we are definitely going to need these things)
>
> _______
> OpenStack-operators mailing list
> OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
>



-- 
Thanks,
Shamail Tahir
t: @ShamailXD
tz: Eastern Time
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators