Open Stack

Thanks Tony for leading the effort. As you know, neutron-upgrades team  
(well, me) actually confused -alt/-2 thing, and I registered a meeting for  
-2.

I am generally for adding more channels assuming they are used wisely  
(like: organizers check in advance they don’t overlap with related  
initiatives), but if hygiene will do the job and give us some useful slot,  
that would work fine too.

Ihar

Tony Breeds <tony at bakeyournoodle.com> wrote:

> Hello all,
>     I'd like you all to consider making a few changes to our IRC meeting infrastructure
>
> TL;DR: I think we need to add #openstack-meeting-5 and make sure people are
>        using it rather then per-project channels
>
> Slightly longer version .....
>
> Capacity
> ========
>     I think we've reached the point in time where we need to consider adding
> another meeting channel for general consumption.  A very quick spot  
> check[1]
> indicates that Mon->Thu from 14:00 -> 17:00 UTC we're at capacity.
>
> We have 4 regular meeting channels:
>     #openstack-meeting, #openstack-meeting-alt, #openstack-meeting-3 and
>     #openstack-meeting-4.
> A newly created "Cross Project" Channel
>     #openstack-meeting-cp, which isn't really for general consumption.
>
> Also in the irc-meeting repo[2] we have 2 'office hours' events. which is  
> how
> in some slots we have > 4 meetings.
>
> I admit I don't have hard data on this but, with more projects being  
> added to
> the big tent *and* several larger projects creating sub-teams, as an
> irc-meetings reviewer it seems to be harder for people to find a slot in  
> one of
> the official channels for meeting.
>
> I understand that we want to keep the number of parallel meetings to a  
> minimum,
> but is it time to add #openstack-meeting-5?
>
> Where to hold meetings?
> =======================
>
> So this is loosely related to the above question in that we have a social
> contract that meetings will happen in one of the regular channels.  There  
> are
> several reasons for this but they boil down to:
>     . Not impacting discussions with meetings and vice versa
>     . Limiting, where possible, number of rooms people need to be in "most of the time"
>     . MeetBot only works correctly in these channels.
>
> So while it's possible to hold a meeting in #openstack-nova it's a  
> deviation
> form the social contract.  Now it's clear that this hasn't been expressly
> communicated recently.  It's also clear that teams have been holding  
> meetings
> outside of the regular channels.
>
> Let me be clear this isn't a blamefest, no deep wrong has been committed,  
> no
> one set out cause problems and if any problems were caused they were  
> minimal.
>
> Having acknowledged that, It'd be great if we could move these meetings  
> back to
> the regular places, and include them on the eavesdrop home page.  These
> meetings are serving their portion of the community well so they're going  
> to
> move the disruption should be minimal.
>
> I just wanted to:
>     . Remind people about the social contract of where to hold a meeting
>     . Add an additional data point to the capacity discussion.
>
> Also I'm looking at adding code to MeetBot to add a warning when running
> meetings outside of the regular channels to encourage the move.
>
> Confusion
> =========
>     So this is really quite trivial.  As you can see above we don't have an
> #openstack-meeting-2 channel the ...-alt is clearly that, but still  
> people are
> confused.  How would people feel about creating #openstack-meeting-2 and  
> making
> it redirect to #openstack-meeting-alt?
>
> Yours Tony.
>
> [1]  
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1lQHKCQa4wQmnWpTMB3DLltY81kIChZumHLHzoMNF07c/edit?usp=sharing
> [2] http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack-infra/irc-meetings
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 455 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20151125/070783d9/attachment.pgp>