[openstack-dev] [all] Onboarding rooms postmortem, what did you do, what worked, lessons learned

Nikhil Komawar nik.komawar at gmail.com
Wed May 24 21:01:05 UTC 2017

Project:  Glance

Attendees: ~15

What was done:

We started by introducing the core team (or whatever existed then), did a
run down of Glance API documentation especially for developers, other
references like notes for ops, best practices. We went through the
architecture of the project. A few were interested in knowing more details
and going in depth so we discussed the design patterns that exist today,
scope of improvements and any blackholes therein, auxiliary services and
performance tradeoffs etc. A lot of the discussion was free form so people
asked questions and session was interactive.

What worked:

1. The projector worked!

2. Session was free form, there was good turnout and it was interactive.
(all the good things)

3. People were serious about contributing as per their
availability/capacity to do upstream and one person showed up asking to do


1. Could have been advertised more at least the session description more

2. A representative from the team could have been officially invited to the
upstream institute training.

3. The community building sessions and on-boarding sessions seem to overlap
a bit so a representative from the team could be help in those sessions for
Q&A or more interaction. Probably more collaboration/prep before the summit
for such things. ($0.02)


On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 1:27 PM, Jay S Bryant <jungleboyj at gmail.com> wrote:

> Project:  Cinder
> Attendees: Approximately 30
> I was really pleased by the number of people that attended the Cinder
> session and the fact that they people in the room seemed engaged with the
> presentation and asked good questions showing interest in the project.  I
> think having the on-boardings rooms was beneficial and hopefully something
> that we can continue.
> Given the number of people in the room we didn't go around and introduce
> everyone.  I did have the Sean McGinnis introduce himself as PTL and had
> the other Cinder Core members introduce themselves so that the attendees
> could put faces with our names.
> From there we kicked off the presentation [1] which covered the following
> high level topics:
>    - Introduction of Cinder's Repos and components
>    - Quick overview of Cinder's architecture/organization
>    - Pointers to the Upstream Institute education (Might have done a bit
>    of a sales pitch for the next session here ;-))
>    - Expanded upon the Upstream Institute education to explain how what
>    was taught there specifically applied to Cinder
>    - Walked through the main Cinder code tree
>    - Described how to test changes to Cinder
> My presentation was designed to assume that attendees had been through
> Upstream Institute.  I had coverage in the slides in case they had not been
> through the education.  Unfortunately most of the class had not been
> through the education so I did spend a portion of time re-iterating those
> concepts and less time was able to be spent at the end going through real
> world examples of working with changes in Cinder.  I got feedback from a
> few people that having some real hands on coding examples would have been
> helpful.
> One way we could possible handle this is to split the on-boarding to a
> introduction section and then a more advanced second session.  The other
> option is that we require people who are attending the on-boarding to have
> been through Upstream Institute.  Something to think about.
> I think it was unfortunate that the session wasn't recorded.  We shared a
> lot of good information (between good questions and having a good
> representation of Cinder's Core team in the room) that it would have been
> nice to capture.  Given this I am planning at some point in the near future
> to work with Walt Boring to record a version of the presentation that can
> be uploaded to our Cinder YouTube channel and include some coding examples.
> In summary, I think the on-boarding rooms were a great addition and the
> Cinder team is pleased with how we used the time.  I think it is something
> we would like to continue to invest time into developing and improving.
> Jay
> [1] https://www.slideshare.net/JayBryant2/openstack-cinder-
> onboarding-education-boston-summit-2017
> On 5/19/2017 3:43 PM, Lance Bragstad wrote:
> Project: Keystone
> Attendees: 12 - 15
> We conflicted with one of the Baremetal/VM sessions
> I attempted to document most of the session in my recap [0].
> We started out by doing a round-the-room of introductions so that folks
> could put IRC nicks to faces (we also didn't have a packed room so this
> went pretty quick). After that we cruised through a summary of keystone,
> the format of the projects, and the various processes we use. All of this
> took *maybe* 30 minutes.
> From there we had an open discussion and things evolved organically. We
> ended up going through:
>    - the differences between the v2.0 and v3 APIs
>    - keystonemiddleware architecture, how it aids services, and how it
>    interacts with keystone
>       - we essentially followed an API call for creating a instance from
>       keystone -> nova -> glance
>    - how authentication scoping works and why it works that way
>    - how federation works and why it's setup the way it is
>    - how federated authentication works (https://goo.gl/NfY3mr)
> All of this was pretty well-received and generated a lot of productive
> discussion. We also had several seasoned keystone contributors in the room,
> which helped a lot. Most of the attendees were all curious about similar
> topics, which was great, but we totally could have split into separate
> groups given the experience we had in the room (we'll save that in our back
> pocket for next time).
> [0] https://www.lbragstad.com/blog/openstack-boston-summit-recap
> [1] https://www.slideshare.net/LanceBragstad/keystone-project-onboarding
> On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 10:37 AM, Michał Jastrzębski <inc007 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> Kolla:
>> Attendees - full room (20-30?)
>> Notes - Conflict with kolla-k8s demo probably didn't help
>> While we didn't have etherpad, slides, recording (and video dongle
>> that could fit my laptop), we had great session with analog tools
>> (whiteboard and my voice chords). We walked through architecture of
>> each Kolla project, how they relate to each other and so on.
>> Couple things to take out from our onboarding:
>> 1. Bring dongles
>> 2. We could've used bigger room - people were leaving because we had
>> no chairs left
>> 3. Recording would be awesome
>> 4. Low tech is not a bad tech
>> All and all, when we started session I didn't know what to expect or
>> what people will expect so we just...rolled with it, and people seemed
>> to be happy with it:) I think onboarding rooms were great idea (kudos
>> to whoever came up with it)! I'll be happy to run it again in Sydney.
>> Cheers,
>> Michal
>> On 19 May 2017 at 08:12, Julien Danjou <julien at danjou.info> wrote:
>> > On Fri, May 19 2017, Sean Dague wrote:
>> >
>> >> If you ran a room, please post the project, what you did in the room,
>> >> what you think worked, what you would have done differently. If you
>> >> attended a room you didn't run, please provide feedback about which one
>> >> it was, and what you thought worked / didn't work from the other side
>> of
>> >> the table.
>> >
>> > We shared a room for Telemetry and CloudKitty for 90 minutes.
>> > I was there with Gordon Chung for Telemetry.
>> > Christophe Sauthier was there for CloudKitty.
>> >
>> > We only had 3 people showing up in the session. One wanted to read his
>> > emails in a quiet room, the two others had a couple of question on
>> > Telemetry – though it was not really related to contribution as far as I
>> > can recall.
>> >
>> > I had to leave after 45 minutes because they was an overlap with a talk
>> > I was doing and rescheduling did not seem possible. And everybody left a
>> > few minutes after I left apparently.
>> >
>> > --
>> > Julien Danjou
>> > -- Free Software hacker
>> > -- https://julien.danjou.info
>> >
>> > ____________________________________________________________
>> ______________
>> > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>> > Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.op
>> enstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>> >
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> ______________
>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscrib
>> e
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribehttp://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
> __________________________________________________________________________
> 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/20170524/beea8124/attachment.html>

More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list