[openstack-dev] [all] Switching to longer development cycles
dtantsur at redhat.com
Thu Dec 14 11:15:08 UTC 2017
On 12/14/2017 05:55 AM, Ed Leafe wrote:
> On Dec 13, 2017, at 4:38 PM, German Eichberger <German.Eichberger at rackspace.com> wrote:
>> It looks like the implicit expectation is that devs also need to attend the Forums at the summit in addition to the PTG. The Forums, though important, hardly made it worthwhile for me to attend the summit (and in fact I skipped Sydney). On the other hand some devs got together and hashed out some plans for their projects. Personally, I feel the PTG is not working if we also have summits – and having two summits and one PTG will make things worse. Therefore I propose to scrap the PTG and add “design summits” back to the OpenStack summit. As a side effect this will be a better on-ramp for casual developers who can’t justify going to the PTG and ensure enough developers are on-hand to hear the operator’s feedback.
> The original purpose of the summits were for the developers to get together to plan what they would work on for the next few months. Over time, the big money came pouring in, and they became huge marketing events, with developers pushed off to the fringes. The recent PTGs have been refreshing because they are more like the original events, where there is no distraction by the corporate marketing machines, and we can focus on getting shit done.
> My question is: if we only have a release once a year, why do we need two Summits a year?
That's a very good question. I'd see the opposite: PTG twice a year with a Forum
after each release. And loop operators into PTGs more.
> -- Ed Leafe
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
More information about the OpenStack-dev