Open Stack

Hello Ben,

We started discussing ways of minimizing collisions between projects like
Cinder and Manila for the upcoming PTG and think we are close to a
solution. More details to come, but that doesn't need to be a con as we are
working to address those issues this PTG :)

-Kendall (diablo_rojo)

On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 12:20 PM Ben Swartzlander <ben at swartzlander.org>
wrote:

> As I've mentioned in past meetings, the Manila community needs to decide
> whether the OpenStack PTG is a venue we want to take advantage of in the
> future. In particular, there's a deadline to declare our plans for the
> Denver PTG in September by the end of the week.
>
> Personally I'm conflicted because there are pros and cons either way,
> but having attended the Summit in Boston last week, I think I have all
> the information needed to form my own opinion and I'd really like to
> hear from the rest of you at the weekly meeting tomorrow.
>
> I believe our choice breaks down into 2 broad categories:
>
> 1) Continue to be involved with PTG. In this case we would need to lobby
> the foundation organizers to reduce the kinds of scheduling conflicts
> that made the Atlanta PTG so problematic for our team.
>
> 2) Drop out of PTG and plan a virtual PTG just for Manila a few weeks
> before or after the official PTG. In this case we would encourage team
> members to get together at the summits for face to face discussions.
>
>
> Pros for (1):
> * This is clearly what the foundation wants
> * For US-based developers it would save money compared to (2)
> * It ensures that timezone issues don't prevent participation in
> discussions
>
> Cons for (1):
> * We'd have to fight with cross project sessions and other project
> sessions (notably Cinder) for time slots to meet. Very likely it will be
> impossible to participate in all 3 tracks, which some of us currently
> try to do.
> * Some developers won't get budget for travel because it's not the kind
> of conference where there are customers and salespeople (and thus lots
> of spare money).
>
> Pros for (2):
> * Virtual meetups have worked out well for us in the past, and they save
> money.
> * It allows us to easily avoid any scheduling conflicts with other tracks.
> * It avoids exhaustion at the PTG itself where trying to participate in
> 3 tracks would probably mean no downtime.
> * It's pretty easy to get budget to travel to summits because there are
> customers and salespeople, so face to face time could be preserved by
> hanging out in hacking rooms and using forum sessions.
>
> Cons for (2):
> * Virtual meetups always cause problems for about 1/3 of the world's
> timezones. In the past this has meant west coast USA, and Asia/Pacific
> have been greatly inconvenienced because most participants where east
> coast USA and Europe based.
> * Less chance for cross pollination to occur at PTG where people from
> other projects drop in.
>
>
> Based on the pros/cons I personally lean towards (2), but I look forward
> to hearing from the community.
>
> There is one more complication affecting this decision, which is that
> the very next summit is planned for Sydney, which is uniquely far away
> and expensive to travel to (for most of the core team). For that summit
> only, I expect the argument that it's easier to travel to summits than
> PTGs to be less true, because Sydney might be simply too expensive or
> time consuming for some of us. In the long run though I expect Sydney to
> be an outlier and most summits will be relatively cheap/easy to travel to.
>
> -Ben Swartzlander
>
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> 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 --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20170517/432ebe9c/attachment.html>