Open Stack

+1 

On Dec 20, 2013, at 11:46 AM, Tim Bell <Tim.Bell at cern.ch> wrote:

> 
> How about we do a mid-summit user/operator boot camp (like the programs do, i.e. February or so) where:
> 
> - we get some operators and users (i.e. those that run and those that consume) OpenStack together
> - we describe our pain points (as Tom would say curse/desk-slam/white-board) 
> - we prepare a set of blueprints and corresponding representatives to explain them to the development community
> - we identify cross-project issues and take them to the TC 
> 
> My experience is that there is significant overlap between us all so it is not necessary to have everyone there, especially if we solicit input before through the ambassadors etc.
> 
> Tim
> 
> On 20 Dec 2013, at 07:55, Tristan Goode <tristan at aptira.com> wrote:
> 
>> I guess the simplest meaning is "all those that are not committing code to
>> the OpenStack code base"? :D
>> 
>> 
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Everett Toews [mailto:everett.toews at RACKSPACE.COM]
>>> Sent: Wednesday, 18 December 2013 1:54 AM
>>> To: Tristan Goode
>>> Cc: Tom Fifield; <openstack at lists.openstack.org>
>>> Subject: Re: [Openstack] Bringing focus to the Operators and Users at
>> the next
>>> summit
>>> 
>>> Hi Tristan,
>>> 
>>> Can you clarify what you meant by Users in your subject line?
>>> 
>>> I took it to mean application developers (i.e. the developers writing
>> applications on
>>> top of OpenStack) and possibly application operators (i.e. the operators
>> deploying
>>> applications on top of OpenStack). They seem to have gotten lost in the
>> discussion
>>> here.
>>> 
>>> Ultimately, OpenStack is being built for them. As I believe was your
>> original intent,
>>> they need a voice in such a forum too. I realize that even less
>> application developers
>>> are likely to attend the summit than operators.
>>> 
>>> However we still need to encourage their involvement and make a place
>> for them.
>>> We also need to encourage operators to gather feedback from their
>> application
>>> developers about their experiences developer on top of OpenStack as I'm
>> sure the
>>> operations folk get an occasional ear full from them. ;)
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> Everett
>>> 
>>> P.S. Just to be clear...because we have a lot of overlapping
>> terminology.
>>> 
>>> application developers = the developers writing applications on top of
>> OpenStack
>>> application operators = the operators deploying applications on top of
>> OpenStack
>>> [OpenStack] developers = the developers writing OpenStack [OpenStack]
>> operators
>>> = the developers deploying OpenStack
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Dec 17, 2013, at 3:24 AM, Tristan Goode wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Perfect stated Tom. Thank you.
>>>> 
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: Tom Fifield [mailto:tom at openstack.org]
>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, 17 December 2013 11:23 AM
>>>>> To: openstack at lists.openstack.org
>>>>> Subject: Re: [Openstack] Bringing focus to the Operators and Users at
>>>> the next
>>>>> summit
>>>>> 
>>>>> On 17/12/13 02:55, Tim Bell wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Specifying something as a bug needs to determine things like 'what
>>>>>> component should this be addressed in' and describing the desired
>>>>>> behaviour. Many of the comments from the survey describe the pain
>>>>>> points, rather than the solutions. Upgrading is difficult, no
>>>>>> mechanism to auto restart VMs on other hypervisors, monitoring
>>>>>> frameworks, inconsistent options in command line tools and APIs, .
>>>>>> equally, missing functional gaps do not fall well into the bug
>> system.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I have received the feedback from operators when raising issues that
>>>>>> they get the response 'contributions are welcome'. Running an
>>>>>> openstack cloud can be non-trivial, especially the big ones, and
>>>>>> there is a need to appreciate that this effort is a significant part
>>>>>> of the OpenStack community effort (along with the blogs, the
>>>>>> documentation updates, the summit presentations).
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I personally have a different proposal to Tristan (although I like
>>>>>> his). my proposal is that each program should have a session
>>>>>> dedicated to user/operator needs at the start.  Between the UC, the
>>>>>> volunteers to look at the survey comments and the user group
>>>>>> ambassadors, we should be able to put together a set of pain points
>>>>>> to be considered for the next release. solutions are up to the
>> design teams.
>>>>> 
>>>>> While I think that having such a session in each program fits well
>>>>> with
>>>> "our" (being
>>>>> "the developers'") mentality and/or schedule, I feel that it does not
>>>> suit with that of
>>>>> operators.
>>>>> 
>>>>> This is because, as an operator, you typically don't just have
>>>>> problems
>>>> or feedback
>>>>> with one project.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Looking through the survey comments, it's likely that if those kind
>>>>> of
>>>> operators were
>>>>> attending summits, they'd have to attend a high fraction of every
>>>>> such
>>>> session.
>>>>> 
>>>>> In addition, points of pain can often be about the integration
>>>>> between
>>>> services, the
>>>>> consistency between them, or whole-of-project issues. Like the fact
>>>>> our
>>>> python
>>>>> clients all have different import lines, or the way DNS works between
>>>> Nova and
>>>>> Neutron, and so on.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> The conversation of late has been leaning towards a happy scenario
>>>>> where "operators" and "developers" come together in a session and the
>>>>> former
>>>> presents
>>>>> their concerns to the latter, who promptly go away and Fix All The
>>>> Things.
>>>>> 
>>>>> To be frank, having been on the "operator" side of the fence, and
>>>> participating in all
>>>>> of the frequent cursing, desk-slamming, whiteboard-workarounding,
>>>> nagios-alert-
>>>>> spam-receiving it takes to run an OpenStack cloud ... I'm not sure we
>>>> can let
>>>>> "operators" loose in such a session without some kind of filter - it
>>>> might put
>>>>> "developers" off helping if we descent into full sysadmin rant :) But
>>>>> we
>>>> do need to
>>>>> get that feedback through somehow.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I have full appreciation for the session that the swift team ran with
>>>> the LINE guys at
>>>>> Hong Kong - that was seriously awesome to hear about and we should be
>>>> doing
>>>>> more of it. Though, I believe some of the value came from the fact
>>>>> that
>>>> it was an
>>>>> individual user stepping through their entire requirements.
>>>>> Challenging
>>>> the
>>>>> assumptions. Quite different from a torrent of people in a room :)
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> The survey comments we've got are good, as is the plan Tim has put
>>>> together to
>>>>> wrangle them into a format where they perhaps can be taken to
>>>>> developers
>>>> as bugs,
>>>>> or blueprints - as Joe suggested. However, due to the nature of the
>>>> survey, they are
>>>>> most often brief, and surface-level.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I believe what "getting Operators in a room" can achieve for us is
>>>> providing that
>>>>> same kind of feedback, but with far greater depth than can be
>>>>> achieved
>>>> by a 200
>>>>> pixel survey box.
>>>>> 
>>>>> A scenario I'd propose is to arrange something where we:
>>>>> 1. allow the full-descent into sysadmin rant, where people feel
>>>> comfortable to air
>>>>> each and every grievance they've had with any part of OpenStack,
>>>> recording all of
>>>>> this (in a manipulable, written format minus
>>>>> cursing)
>>>>> 2. refuel our sysadmins with [beverage], while a small team attempts
>>>>> to
>>>> wrangle the
>>>>> mass of comment into something that can be discussed 3. bring back in
>>>> the fearless
>>>>> operators, then have a more structured discussion about which items
>>>>> are
>>>> really the
>>>>> big ones - and dive deeper into those so a full understanding is had
>>>>> of
>>>> use-
>>>>> cases/'whys'/'whats'
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> at the conclusion of this session, we clean it up a bit and can pass
>>>>> it
>>>> on to our super-
>>>>> awesome "developers", who probably haven't had time to make it to
>>>>> this
>>>> multi-hour
>>>>> session, but will subsequently bow in awe of all of the awesome
>>>> suggestions and
>>>>> people who love their work :)
>>>>> 
>>>>> For thoroughness, this passing-to could happen at session-per-program
>>>>> as suggested, or in some other asynchronous way.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Tom
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Tim
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> *From:*Joe Gordon [mailto:joe.gordon0 at gmail.com]
>>>>>> *Sent:* 16 December 2013 18:38
>>>>>> *To:* Tristan Goode
>>>>>> *Cc:* openstack at lists.openstack.org
>>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [Openstack] Bringing focus to the Operators and Users
>>>>>> at the next summit
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 10:36 PM, Tristan Goode <tristan at aptira.com
>>>>>> <mailto:tristan at aptira.com>> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>  I'm trying to establish a feedback loop "because" we (Operators,
>>>>>>  Users, etc)
>>>>>>  need to better present our actual real world, evidence based
>>>>>>  Operator, User,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>  and even other input like Sales and Marketing experiences back
>>>>>> into the
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>  development teams. Much of this does and will come from the great
>>>>>>  work of
>>>>>>  the UC, the User surveys, and especially the folks that have
>>>>>>  volunteered to
>>>>>>  analyse the survey results. I'm hoping to build on the survey
>>>>>>  analysis and
>>>>>>  collaboratively and constructively focus that to present a
>>>> blueprint or
>>>>>>  roadmap with a "whole of OpenStack" scope. We can dig deeper into
>>>>>>  the user
>>>>>>  survey feedback and break beyond the bounds of the limited format
>>>> of the
>>>>>>  user survey to seed the discussion. For me, the most valuable
>>>> session in
>>>>>>  Hong Kong was the discussion led by Tim of the user survey. It
>> was
>>>>>>  however,
>>>>>>  all too short.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Do you have any examples of what kind of feedback you would like to
>>>>>> pass on to developers (I was unable to attend Tim's discussion of
>>>>>> the user survey)?  Also just playing devils advocate here, but why
>>>>>> not use our bug system to provide feedback?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>> From: Sean Dague [mailto:sean at dague.net <mailto:sean at dague.net>]
>>>>>>> Sent: Saturday, 14 December 2013 3:02 AM
>>>>>>> To: openstack at lists.openstack.org
>>>>>>  <mailto:openstack at lists.openstack.org>
>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Openstack] Bringing focus to the Operators and
>>>> Users
>>>>>>  at the
>>>>>>> next
>>>>>>> summit
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> So not that I don't think this is a worth while thing, because I
>>>>>>  think it
>>>>>>> is. But instead
>>>>>>> of jumping to the solution of a User Day, it might be useful to
>>>>>>  figure out
>>>>>>> what's
>>>>>>> attempting to be solved.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Is it?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 1) get Users together to share best practices among themselves?
>>>>>>  Because
>>>>>>> lots of
>>>>>>> people have learned things, and want to bootstrap others.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 2) get Users and Operators together to share best practices
>>>> among
>>>>>>> themselves?
>>>>>>> Because ...
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 3) get Vendors and Users and Operators together? Because ...
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 4) get Developers and Users and Operators together? Because ....
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I think if you start with defining the Because ... part, then
>>>> the
>>>>>>  needed
>>>>>>> parties, then
>>>>>>> the odds of this being successful and useful to folks goes way
>>>> up.
>>>>>>  It also
>>>>>>> would give
>>>>>>> people attending a reasonable expectation of what they are going
>>>>>>  to get
>>>>>>> out of it.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Because it would be a shame to set up #1, if most people thought
>>>>>>  they were
>>>>>>> getting
>>>>>>> #4 (which is basically what Lorin was proposing with his adopt a
>>>>>>  developer
>>>>>>> idea),
>>>>>>> then people being disappointed that they didn't get what they
>>>>>>  thought they
>>>>>>> were
>>>>>>> getting.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> The design summit works pretty well for the development
>>>> community
>>>>>>  because
>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>> how narrowly it is scoped. So a critical mass in each of those
>>>>>>  rooms knows
>>>>>>> when it's
>>>>>>> getting off track and how to pull it back to something
>>>> actionable
>>>>>>  at the
>>>>>>> end.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>    -Sean
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On 12/13/2013 06:05 AM, Tristan Goode wrote:
>>>>>>>> I guess what I'm trying to say by "Users and Operators" covers
>>>>>>>> carriers and telcos. By User I mean folks that consume
>>>> OpenStack
>>>>>>>> resources and by Operator I mean folks that supply OpenStack
>>>>>>>> resources. Maybe all can be called Users but whatever one
>>>> calls it,
>>>>>>>> what I mean basically is Non-Developers actually working on
>>>> and with
>>>>>>>> OpenStack. :)
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Cheers
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Tristan
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> *From:*Kyle MacDonald [mailto:kyle.macdonald at gmail.com
>>>>>>  <mailto:kyle.macdonald at gmail.com>
>>>>>>>> <mailto:kyle.macdonald at gmail.com
>>>>> <mailto:kyle.macdonald at gmail.com>>]
>>>>>>>> *Sent:* Thursday, 12 December 2013 7:02 PM
>>>>>>>> *To:* Tristan Goode
>>>>>>>> *Cc:* openstack at lists.openstack.org
>>>>>>  <mailto:openstack at lists.openstack.org>
>>>>>>>> <mailto:openstack at lists.openstack.org
>>>>>>  <mailto:openstack at lists.openstack.org>>
>>>>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [Openstack] Bringing focus to the Operators and
>>>> Users
>>>>>>>> at the next summit
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Tristan
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> I like this idea and agree it should be a priority. I do
>>>> suggest the
>>>>>>>> focus area be expanded (or a second focus day) to accommodate
>>>>>>  carriers
>>>>>>>> and telcos and their operations needs (they are real
>>>> operators).
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> There is a ton of work being done by the leading telco's
>>>> around NFV
>>>>>>>> and SDN (many in emerging use cases) using OpenStack. I can
>>>> very
>>>>>>>> easily see "operations" being a killer issue and something
>>>> that
>>>>>>  should
>>>>>>>> be more broadly addressed. Last summit the forum for that
>>>> track of
>>>>>>>> discussions was by a vendor - next summit this area should be
>>>> made
>>>>>>>> more neutral and inclusive.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Kyle
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On Dec 11, 2013, at 10:55 PM, Tristan Goode
>>>> <tristan at aptira.com
>>>>>>  <mailto:tristan at aptira.com>
>>>>>>>> <mailto:tristan at aptira.com <mailto:tristan at aptira.com>>>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>  G'day OpenStackLand,
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>  I have an idea for the next summit to put forward...
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>  Like we have the various project design summit session
>>>> days
>>>>>>  at the
>>>>>>>>  summits, I think it'd be really useful to have an
>>>> Operators and
>>>>>>>>  Users day at the very start of the next summit (and
>>>>>>  hopefully all of
>>>>>>>>  them in future if it works out). So far at the last 4
>>>>>>  summits I've
>>>>>>>>  attended, from the users and operators point of view we've
>>>>>>  had a rag
>>>>>>>>  tag bunch of disconnected panels and 40 minute sessions
>>>> that
>>>>>>  really
>>>>>>>>  don't get anywhere much and don't make it to any sort of
>>>> plan or
>>>>>>>>  worthwhile result. This proposed "Operators and Users" day
>>>>>>  will be
>>>>>>>>  run like the design summit session days where all of us
>>>> that
>>>>>>  have to
>>>>>>>>  deal with the consequences of the software development of
>>>> this
>>>>>>>>  project sit in a room and work the issues. The goal is to
>>>>>>  present
>>>>>>>>  real world, evidence based Operator, User, and even other
>>>>>>  input like
>>>>>>>>  Sales and Marketing experiences back into the development
>>>> teams.
>>>>>>>>  Maybe we might even have our own "Operators and Users"
>>>>>>  lounge too.
>>>>>>>> :-P
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>  Cheers
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>  Tristan
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>  _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>  Mailing list:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
>>>>>>>>  Post to     : openstack at lists.openstack.org
>>>>>>  <mailto:openstack at lists.openstack.org>
>>>>>>>>  <mailto:openstack at lists.openstack.org
>>>>>>  <mailto:openstack at lists.openstack.org>>
>>>>>>>>  Unsubscribe :
>>>>>>>> 
>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Mailing list:
>>>>>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
>>>>>>>> Post to     : openstack at lists.openstack.org
>>>>>>  <mailto:openstack at lists.openstack.org>
>>>>>>>> Unsubscribe :
>>>>>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Sean Dague
>>>>>>> http://dague.net
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>  _______________________________________________
>>>>>>  Mailing list:
>>>>>>  http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
>>>>>>  Post to     : openstack at lists.openstack.org
>>>>>>  <mailto:openstack at lists.openstack.org>
>>>>>>  Unsubscribe :
>>>>>>  http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Mailing list:
>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
>>>>>> Post to     : openstack at lists.openstack.org
>>>>>> Unsubscribe :
>>>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Mailing list:
>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
>>>>> Post to     : openstack at lists.openstack.org
>>>>> Unsubscribe :
>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Mailing list:
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
>>>> Post to     : openstack at lists.openstack.org
>>>> Unsubscribe :
>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Mailing list: http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
>> Post to     : openstack at lists.openstack.org
>> Unsubscribe : http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
> Post to     : openstack at lists.openstack.org
> Unsubscribe : http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack