Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Do we need to have a mid-cycle?

On 11/23/2015 01:00 PM, Jim Rollenhagen wrote: > On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 06:05:54AM -0800, Jim Rollenhagen wrote: >> >> Another idea I floated last week was to do a virtual midcycle of sorts. >> Treat it like a normal midcycle in that everyone tells their management >> "I'm out for 3-4 days for

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Do we need to have a mid-cycle?

On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 06:05:54AM -0800, Jim Rollenhagen wrote: > > Another idea I floated last week was to do a virtual midcycle of sorts. > Treat it like a normal midcycle in that everyone tells their management > "I'm out for 3-4 days for the midcycle", but they don't travel anywhere. > We

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Do we need to have a mid-cycle?

On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 12:35 AM, Jim Rollenhagen wrote: > > > My preference is 4) no mid-cycle -- and try to work more effectively with > > people in different locations and time zones. > > ++ that was part of my thought process when I proposed not having an > official

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Do we need to have a mid-cycle?

> > Another idea I floated last week was to do a virtual midcycle of sorts. > > Treat it like a normal midcycle in that everyone tells their management > > "I'm out for 3-4 days for the midcycle", but they don't travel anywhere. > > We come up with an agenda, see if there's any planning/syncing

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Do we need to have a mid-cycle?

Hi, > I sent a new idea to openstack-dev, and nobody has opinions? :P > > I'd like to get consensus on this soon, please do reply if you have > thoughts on this. > Sorry for the delay... Yeah, I've no problem giving this virtual midcycle idea a go, so +1

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Do we need to have a mid-cycle?

Me too :) +1 for trying a virtual midcycle On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 8:55 AM, Lucas Alvares Gomes wrote: > Hi, > > > I sent a new idea to openstack-dev, and nobody has opinions? :P > > > > I'd like to get consensus on this soon, please do reply if you have > > thoughts on

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Do we need to have a mid-cycle?

Seems good to me too. On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 5:07 PM, John Villalovos wrote: > Me too :) > > +1 for trying a virtual midcycle > > On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 8:55 AM, Lucas Alvares Gomes < > lucasago...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> > I sent a new idea to

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Do we need to have a mid-cycle?

On 11/16/2015 03:05 PM, Jim Rollenhagen wrote: On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 12:16:34PM -0500, Ruby Loo wrote: On 10 November 2015 at 12:08, Dmitry Tantsur wrote: On 11/10/2015 05:45 PM, Lucas Alvares Gomes wrote: Hi, In the last Ironic meeting [1] we started a discussion

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Do we need to have a mid-cycle?

On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 06:05:54AM -0800, Jim Rollenhagen wrote: > On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 12:16:34PM -0500, Ruby Loo wrote: > > On 10 November 2015 at 12:08, Dmitry Tantsur wrote: > > > > > On 11/10/2015 05:45 PM, Lucas Alvares Gomes wrote: > > > > > >> Hi, > > >> > > >> In

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Do we need to have a mid-cycle?

in Liberty, we did a virtual meetup in for the telemetry team so i thought i'd share experience. On 16/11/2015 9:05 AM, Jim Rollenhagen wrote: Then we can set up some hangouts (or similar) to get people in the same "room" working on things. Time zones will get weird, but we tend to hangouts is

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Do we need to have a mid-cycle?

On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 12:16:34PM -0500, Ruby Loo wrote: > On 10 November 2015 at 12:08, Dmitry Tantsur wrote: > > > On 11/10/2015 05:45 PM, Lucas Alvares Gomes wrote: > > > >> Hi, > >> > >> In the last Ironic meeting [1] we started a discussion about whether > >> we need

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Do we need to have a mid-cycle?

On 10 November 2015 at 12:08, Dmitry Tantsur wrote: > On 11/10/2015 05:45 PM, Lucas Alvares Gomes wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> In the last Ironic meeting [1] we started a discussion about whether >> we need to have a mid-cycle meeting for the Mitaka cycle or not. Some >> ideas

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Do we need to have a mid-cycle?

My order of preference would be: 1. Coordinated regional mid-cycles 2. Normal mid-cycle 3. Virtual mid-cycle 4. No mid-cycle Thanks, John On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 10:45 AM, Lucas Alvares Gomes wrote: > Hi, > > In the last Ironic meeting [1] we started a discussion about

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Do we need to have a mid-cycle?

On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 11:16 AM, Ruby Loo wrote: > On 10 November 2015 at 12:08, Dmitry Tantsur wrote: > >> On 11/10/2015 05:45 PM, Lucas Alvares Gomes wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> In the last Ironic meeting [1] we started a discussion about whether >>>

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Do we need to have a mid-cycle?

On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 3:15 AM, Lucas Alvares Gomes wrote: > > So, what people think about it? Should we have a mid-cycle for the > Mitaka release or not? If so, what format should we use? > I like the idea of having a midcycle as it's a useful sync point, so my

[openstack-dev] [Ironic] Do we need to have a mid-cycle?

Hi, In the last Ironic meeting [1] we started a discussion about whether we need to have a mid-cycle meeting for the Mitaka cycle or not. Some ideas about the format of the midcycle were presented in that conversation and this email is just a follow up on that conversation. The ideas presented

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Do we need to have a mid-cycle?

On 11/10/2015 05:45 PM, Lucas Alvares Gomes wrote: Hi, In the last Ironic meeting [1] we started a discussion about whether we need to have a mid-cycle meeting for the Mitaka cycle or not. Some ideas about the format of the midcycle were presented in that conversation and this email is just a