<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
span.hoenzb
{mso-style-name:hoenzb;}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>I’d like to repeat a suggestion at the Design Summit wrap up – it’s a bit different, so patience…<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>My suggestion was to insert a day “break” into the four day Design Summit for users/operations. Effectively, we’d have a four day design summit with Monday+Tuesday - break for user/ops conf – Thursday+Friday. This would allow the developers and PTLs to join in the conference parts of the summit without needed a distinct event. The regular non-design conference could be held Tuesday-Thursday so there’s a specific overlap day when 100% of the community would be together.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>I felt like this allows ideas from the summit to be socialized with users/operator before we commit to them. I also felt that it makes the developers more accessible. Finally, it creates a break/reflection from the intensity of the design.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>To recap, 4 day design, 3 day user/ops conference spanning 5 days.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><a name="_____replyseparator"></a><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> Matthew Ray [mailto:matthewhray@gmail.com] <br><b>Sent:</b> Friday, December 20, 2013 9:58 PM<br><b>To:</b> Tim Bell<br><b>Cc:</b> <openstack@lists.openstack.org><br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [Openstack] Bringing focus to the Operators and Users at the next summit<br><b>Importance:</b> Low<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal>Yes please, the sooner something can be planned the better. The gap between development and operations is growing bigger every release.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal>On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 1:46 PM, Tim Bell <<a href="mailto:Tim.Bell@cern.ch" target="_blank">Tim.Bell@cern.ch</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><br>How about we do a mid-summit user/operator boot camp (like the programs do, i.e. February or so) where:<br><br>- we get some operators and users (i.e. those that run and those that consume) OpenStack together<br>- we describe our pain points (as Tom would say curse/desk-slam/white-board)<br>- we prepare a set of blueprints and corresponding representatives to explain them to the development community<br>- we identify cross-project issues and take them to the TC<br><br>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.<br><span style='color:#888888'><br><span class=hoenzb>Tim</span></span><o:p></o:p></p><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><br>On 20 Dec 2013, at 07:55, Tristan Goode <<a href="mailto:tristan@aptira.com">tristan@aptira.com</a>> wrote:<br><br>> I guess the simplest meaning is "all those that are not committing code to<br>> the OpenStack code base"? :D<br>><br>><br>>> -----Original Message-----<br>>> From: Everett Toews [mailto:<a href="mailto:everett.toews@RACKSPACE.COM">everett.toews@RACKSPACE.COM</a>]<br>>> Sent: Wednesday, 18 December 2013 1:54 AM<br>>> To: Tristan Goode<br>>> Cc: Tom Fifield; <<a href="mailto:openstack@lists.openstack.org">openstack@lists.openstack.org</a>><br>>> Subject: Re: [Openstack] Bringing focus to the Operators and Users at<br>> the next<br>>> summit<br>>><br>>> Hi Tristan,<br>>><br>>> Can you clarify what you meant by Users in your subject line?<br>>><br>>> I took it to mean application developers (i.e. the developers writing<br>> applications on<br>>> top of OpenStack) and possibly application operators (i.e. the operators<br>> deploying<br>>> applications on top of OpenStack). They seem to have gotten lost in the<br>> discussion<br>>> here.<br>>><br>>> Ultimately, OpenStack is being built for them. As I believe was your<br>> original intent,<br>>> they need a voice in such a forum too. I realize that even less<br>> application developers<br>>> are likely to attend the summit than operators.<br>>><br>>> However we still need to encourage their involvement and make a place<br>> for them.<br>>> We also need to encourage operators to gather feedback from their<br>> application<br>>> developers about their experiences developer on top of OpenStack as I'm<br>> sure the<br>>> operations folk get an occasional ear full from them. ;)<br>>><br>>> Thanks,<br>>> Everett<br>>><br>>> P.S. Just to be clear...because we have a lot of overlapping<br>> terminology.<br>>><br>>> application developers = the developers writing applications on top of<br>> OpenStack<br>>> application operators = the operators deploying applications on top of<br>> OpenStack<br>>> [OpenStack] developers = the developers writing OpenStack [OpenStack]<br>> operators<br>>> = the developers deploying OpenStack<br>>><br>>><br>>> On Dec 17, 2013, at 3:24 AM, Tristan Goode wrote:<br>>><br>>>> Perfect stated Tom. Thank you.<br>>>><br>>>>> -----Original Message-----<br>>>>> From: Tom Fifield [mailto:<a href="mailto:tom@openstack.org">tom@openstack.org</a>]<br>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, 17 December 2013 11:23 AM<br>>>>> To: <a href="mailto:openstack@lists.openstack.org">openstack@lists.openstack.org</a><br>>>>> Subject: Re: [Openstack] Bringing focus to the Operators and Users at<br>>>> the next<br>>>>> summit<br>>>>><br>>>>> On 17/12/13 02:55, Tim Bell wrote:<br>>>>>><br>>>>>><br>>>>>> Specifying something as a bug needs to determine things like 'what<br>>>>>> component should this be addressed in' and describing the desired<br>>>>>> behaviour. Many of the comments from the survey describe the pain<br>>>>>> points, rather than the solutions. Upgrading is difficult, no<br>>>>>> mechanism to auto restart VMs on other hypervisors, monitoring<br>>>>>> frameworks, inconsistent options in command line tools and APIs, .<br>>>>>> equally, missing functional gaps do not fall well into the bug<br>> system.<br>>>>>><br>>>>>><br>>>>>><br>>>>>> I have received the feedback from operators when raising issues that<br>>>>>> they get the response 'contributions are welcome'. Running an<br>>>>>> openstack cloud can be non-trivial, especially the big ones, and<br>>>>>> there is a need to appreciate that this effort is a significant part<br>>>>>> of the OpenStack community effort (along with the blogs, the<br>>>>>> documentation updates, the summit presentations).<br>>>>>><br>>>>>><br>>>>>><br>>>>>> I personally have a different proposal to Tristan (although I like<br>>>>>> his). my proposal is that each program should have a session<br>>>>>> dedicated to user/operator needs at the start. Between the UC, the<br>>>>>> volunteers to look at the survey comments and the user group<br>>>>>> ambassadors, we should be able to put together a set of pain points<br>>>>>> to be considered for the next release. solutions are up to the<br>> design teams.<br>>>>><br>>>>> While I think that having such a session in each program fits well<br>>>>> with<br>>>> "our" (being<br>>>>> "the developers'") mentality and/or schedule, I feel that it does not<br>>>> suit with that of<br>>>>> operators.<br>>>>><br>>>>> This is because, as an operator, you typically don't just have<br>>>>> problems<br>>>> or feedback<br>>>>> with one project.<br>>>>><br>>>>> Looking through the survey comments, it's likely that if those kind<br>>>>> of<br>>>> operators were<br>>>>> attending summits, they'd have to attend a high fraction of every<br>>>>> such<br>>>> session.<br>>>>><br>>>>> In addition, points of pain can often be about the integration<br>>>>> between<br>>>> services, the<br>>>>> consistency between them, or whole-of-project issues. Like the fact<br>>>>> our<br>>>> python<br>>>>> clients all have different import lines, or the way DNS works between<br>>>> Nova and<br>>>>> Neutron, and so on.<br>>>>><br>>>>><br>>>>> The conversation of late has been leaning towards a happy scenario<br>>>>> where "operators" and "developers" come together in a session and the<br>>>>> former<br>>>> presents<br>>>>> their concerns to the latter, who promptly go away and Fix All The<br>>>> Things.<br>>>>><br>>>>> To be frank, having been on the "operator" side of the fence, and<br>>>> participating in all<br>>>>> of the frequent cursing, desk-slamming, whiteboard-workarounding,<br>>>> nagios-alert-<br>>>>> spam-receiving it takes to run an OpenStack cloud ... I'm not sure we<br>>>> can let<br>>>>> "operators" loose in such a session without some kind of filter - it<br>>>> might put<br>>>>> "developers" off helping if we descent into full sysadmin rant :) But<br>>>>> we<br>>>> do need to<br>>>>> get that feedback through somehow.<br>>>>><br>>>>> I have full appreciation for the session that the swift team ran with<br>>>> the LINE guys at<br>>>>> Hong Kong - that was seriously awesome to hear about and we should be<br>>>> doing<br>>>>> more of it. Though, I believe some of the value came from the fact<br>>>>> that<br>>>> it was an<br>>>>> individual user stepping through their entire requirements.<br>>>>> Challenging<br>>>> the<br>>>>> assumptions. Quite different from a torrent of people in a room :)<br>>>>><br>>>>><br>>>>> The survey comments we've got are good, as is the plan Tim has put<br>>>> together to<br>>>>> wrangle them into a format where they perhaps can be taken to<br>>>>> developers<br>>>> as bugs,<br>>>>> or blueprints - as Joe suggested. However, due to the nature of the<br>>>> survey, they are<br>>>>> most often brief, and surface-level.<br>>>>><br>>>>> I believe what "getting Operators in a room" can achieve for us is<br>>>> providing that<br>>>>> same kind of feedback, but with far greater depth than can be<br>>>>> achieved<br>>>> by a 200<br>>>>> pixel survey box.<br>>>>><br>>>>> A scenario I'd propose is to arrange something where we:<br>>>>> 1. allow the full-descent into sysadmin rant, where people feel<br>>>> comfortable to air<br>>>>> each and every grievance they've had with any part of OpenStack,<br>>>> recording all of<br>>>>> this (in a manipulable, written format minus<br>>>>> cursing)<br>>>>> 2. refuel our sysadmins with [beverage], while a small team attempts<br>>>>> to<br>>>> wrangle the<br>>>>> mass of comment into something that can be discussed 3. bring back in<br>>>> the fearless<br>>>>> operators, then have a more structured discussion about which items<br>>>>> are<br>>>> really the<br>>>>> big ones - and dive deeper into those so a full understanding is had<br>>>>> of<br>>>> use-<br>>>>> cases/'whys'/'whats'<br>>>>><br>>>>><br>>>>> at the conclusion of this session, we clean it up a bit and can pass<br>>>>> it<br>>>> on to our super-<br>>>>> awesome "developers", who probably haven't had time to make it to<br>>>>> this<br>>>> multi-hour<br>>>>> session, but will subsequently bow in awe of all of the awesome<br>>>> suggestions and<br>>>>> people who love their work :)<br>>>>><br>>>>> For thoroughness, this passing-to could happen at session-per-program<br>>>>> as suggested, or in some other asynchronous way.<br>>>>><br>>>>><br>>>>> Regards,<br>>>>><br>>>>><br>>>>><br>>>>> Tom<br>>>>><br>>>>><br>>>>>><br>>>>>><br>>>>>> Tim<br>>>>>><br>>>>>><br>>>>>><br>>>>>> *From:*Joe Gordon [mailto:<a href="mailto:joe.gordon0@gmail.com">joe.gordon0@gmail.com</a>]<br>>>>>> *Sent:* 16 December 2013 18:38<br>>>>>> *To:* Tristan Goode<br>>>>>> *Cc:* <a href="mailto:openstack@lists.openstack.org">openstack@lists.openstack.org</a><br>>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [Openstack] Bringing focus to the Operators and Users<br>>>>>> at the next summit<br>>>>>><br>>>>>><br>>>>>><br>>>>>><br>>>>>><br>>>>>><br>>>>>><br>>>>>> On Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 10:36 PM, Tristan Goode <<a href="mailto:tristan@aptira.com">tristan@aptira.com</a><br>>>>>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:tristan@aptira.com">tristan@aptira.com</a>>> wrote:<br>>>>>><br>>>>>> I'm trying to establish a feedback loop "because" we (Operators,<br>>>>>> Users, etc)<br>>>>>> need to better present our actual real world, evidence based<br>>>>>> Operator, User,<br>>>>>><br>>>>>> and even other input like Sales and Marketing experiences back<br>>>>>> into the<br>>>>>><br>>>>>> development teams. Much of this does and will come from the great<br>>>>>> work of<br>>>>>> the UC, the User surveys, and especially the folks that have<br>>>>>> volunteered to<br>>>>>> analyse the survey results. I'm hoping to build on the survey<br>>>>>> analysis and<br>>>>>> collaboratively and constructively focus that to present a<br>>>> blueprint or<br>>>>>> roadmap with a "whole of OpenStack" scope. We can dig deeper into<br>>>>>> the user<br>>>>>> survey feedback and break beyond the bounds of the limited format<br>>>> of the<br>>>>>> user survey to seed the discussion. For me, the most valuable<br>>>> session in<br>>>>>> Hong Kong was the discussion led by Tim of the user survey. It<br>> was<br>>>>>> however,<br>>>>>> all too short.<br>>>>>><br>>>>>><br>>>>>><br>>>>>> Do you have any examples of what kind of feedback you would like to<br>>>>>> pass on to developers (I was unable to attend Tim's discussion of<br>>>>>> the user survey)? Also just playing devils advocate here, but why<br>>>>>> not use our bug system to provide feedback?<br>>>>>><br>>>>>><br>>>>>><br>>>>>><br>>>>>><br>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----<br>>>>>>> From: Sean Dague [mailto:<a href="mailto:sean@dague.net">sean@dague.net</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:sean@dague.net">sean@dague.net</a>>]<br>>>>>>> Sent: Saturday, 14 December 2013 3:02 AM<br>>>>>>> To: <a href="mailto:openstack@lists.openstack.org">openstack@lists.openstack.org</a><br>>>>>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:openstack@lists.openstack.org">openstack@lists.openstack.org</a>><br>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Openstack] Bringing focus to the Operators and<br>>>> Users<br>>>>>> at the<br>>>>>>> next<br>>>>>>> summit<br>>>>>>><br>>>>>>> So not that I don't think this is a worth while thing, because I<br>>>>>> think it<br>>>>>>> is. But instead<br>>>>>>> of jumping to the solution of a User Day, it might be useful to<br>>>>>> figure out<br>>>>>>> what's<br>>>>>>> attempting to be solved.<br>>>>>>><br>>>>>>> Is it?<br>>>>>>><br>>>>>>> 1) get Users together to share best practices among themselves?<br>>>>>> Because<br>>>>>>> lots of<br>>>>>>> people have learned things, and want to bootstrap others.<br>>>>>>><br>>>>>>> 2) get Users and Operators together to share best practices<br>>>> among<br>>>>>>> themselves?<br>>>>>>> Because ...<br>>>>>>><br>>>>>>> 3) get Vendors and Users and Operators together? Because ...<br>>>>>>><br>>>>>>> 4) get Developers and Users and Operators together? Because ....<br>>>>>>><br>>>>>>> I think if you start with defining the Because ... part, then<br>>>> the<br>>>>>> needed<br>>>>>>> parties, then<br>>>>>>> the odds of this being successful and useful to folks goes way<br>>>> up.<br>>>>>> It also<br>>>>>>> would give<br>>>>>>> people attending a reasonable expectation of what they are going<br>>>>>> to get<br>>>>>>> out of it.<br>>>>>>><br>>>>>>> Because it would be a shame to set up #1, if most people thought<br>>>>>> they were<br>>>>>>> getting<br>>>>>>> #4 (which is basically what Lorin was proposing with his adopt a<br>>>>>> developer<br>>>>>>> idea),<br>>>>>>> then people being disappointed that they didn't get what they<br>>>>>> thought they<br>>>>>>> were<br>>>>>>> getting.<br>>>>>>><br>>>>>>> The design summit works pretty well for the development<br>>>> community<br>>>>>> because<br>>>>>>> of<br>>>>>>> how narrowly it is scoped. So a critical mass in each of those<br>>>>>> rooms knows<br>>>>>>> when it's<br>>>>>>> getting off track and how to pull it back to something<br>>>> actionable<br>>>>>> at the<br>>>>>>> end.<br>>>>>>><br>>>>>>> -Sean<br>>>>>>><br>>>>>>> On 12/13/2013 06:05 AM, Tristan Goode wrote:<br>>>>>>>> I guess what I'm trying to say by "Users and Operators" covers<br>>>>>>>> carriers and telcos. By User I mean folks that consume<br>>>> OpenStack<br>>>>>>>> resources and by Operator I mean folks that supply OpenStack<br>>>>>>>> resources. Maybe all can be called Users but whatever one<br>>>> calls it,<br>>>>>>>> what I mean basically is Non-Developers actually working on<br>>>> and with<br>>>>>>>> OpenStack. :)<br>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>> Cheers<br>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>> Tristan<br>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>> *From:*Kyle MacDonald [mailto:<a href="mailto:kyle.macdonald@gmail.com">kyle.macdonald@gmail.com</a><br>>>>>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:kyle.macdonald@gmail.com">kyle.macdonald@gmail.com</a>><br>>>>>>>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:kyle.macdonald@gmail.com">kyle.macdonald@gmail.com</a><br>>>>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:kyle.macdonald@gmail.com">kyle.macdonald@gmail.com</a>>>]<br>>>>>>>> *Sent:* Thursday, 12 December 2013 7:02 PM<br>>>>>>>> *To:* Tristan Goode<br>>>>>>>> *Cc:* <a href="mailto:openstack@lists.openstack.org">openstack@lists.openstack.org</a><br>>>>>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:openstack@lists.openstack.org">openstack@lists.openstack.org</a>><br>>>>>>>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:openstack@lists.openstack.org">openstack@lists.openstack.org</a><br>>>>>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:openstack@lists.openstack.org">openstack@lists.openstack.org</a>>><br>>>>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [Openstack] Bringing focus to the Operators and<br>>>> Users<br>>>>>>>> at the next summit<br>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>> Tristan<br>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>> I like this idea and agree it should be a priority. I do<br>>>> suggest the<br>>>>>>>> focus area be expanded (or a second focus day) to accommodate<br>>>>>> carriers<br>>>>>>>> and telcos and their operations needs (they are real<br>>>> operators).<br>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>> There is a ton of work being done by the leading telco's<br>>>> around NFV<br>>>>>>>> and SDN (many in emerging use cases) using OpenStack. I can<br>>>> very<br>>>>>>>> easily see "operations" being a killer issue and something<br>>>> that<br>>>>>> should<br>>>>>>>> be more broadly addressed. Last summit the forum for that<br>>>> track of<br>>>>>>>> discussions was by a vendor - next summit this area should be<br>>>> made<br>>>>>>>> more neutral and inclusive.<br>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>> Kyle<br>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>> On Dec 11, 2013, at 10:55 PM, Tristan Goode<br>>>> <<a href="mailto:tristan@aptira.com">tristan@aptira.com</a><br>>>>>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:tristan@aptira.com">tristan@aptira.com</a>><br>>>>>>>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:tristan@aptira.com">tristan@aptira.com</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:tristan@aptira.com">tristan@aptira.com</a>>>><br>>>> wrote:<br>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>> G'day OpenStackLand,<br>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>> I have an idea for the next summit to put forward...<br>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>> Like we have the various project design summit session<br>>>> days<br>>>>>> at the<br>>>>>>>> summits, I think it'd be really useful to have an<br>>>> Operators and<br>>>>>>>> Users day at the very start of the next summit (and<br>>>>>> hopefully all of<br>>>>>>>> them in future if it works out). So far at the last 4<br>>>>>> summits I've<br>>>>>>>> attended, from the users and operators point of view we've<br>>>>>> had a rag<br>>>>>>>> tag bunch of disconnected panels and 40 minute sessions<br>>>> that<br>>>>>> really<br>>>>>>>> don't get anywhere much and don't make it to any sort of<br>>>> plan or<br>>>>>>>> worthwhile result. This proposed "Operators and Users" day<br>>>>>> will be<br>>>>>>>> run like the design summit session days where all of us<br>>>> that<br>>>>>> have to<br>>>>>>>> deal with the consequences of the software development of<br>>>> this<br>>>>>>>> project sit in a room and work the issues. The goal is to<br>>>>>> present<br>>>>>>>> real world, evidence based Operator, User, and even other<br>>>>>> input like<br>>>>>>>> Sales and Marketing experiences back into the development<br>>>> teams.<br>>>>>>>> Maybe we might even have our own "Operators and Users"<br>>>>>> lounge too.<br>>>>>>>> :-P<br>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>> Cheers<br>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>> Tristan<br>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________<br>>>>>>>> Mailing list:<br>>>>>>>><br>>>> <a href="http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack" target="_blank">http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack</a><br>>>>>>>> Post to : <a href="mailto:openstack@lists.openstack.org">openstack@lists.openstack.org</a><br>>>>>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:openstack@lists.openstack.org">openstack@lists.openstack.org</a>><br>>>>>>>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:openstack@lists.openstack.org">openstack@lists.openstack.org</a><br>>>>>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:openstack@lists.openstack.org">openstack@lists.openstack.org</a>>><br>>>>>>>> Unsubscribe :<br>>>>>>>><br>>>> <a href="http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack" target="_blank">http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack</a><br>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________<br>>>>>>>> Mailing list:<br>>>>>>>> <a href="http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack" target="_blank">http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack</a><br>>>>>>>> Post to : <a href="mailto:openstack@lists.openstack.org">openstack@lists.openstack.org</a><br>>>>>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:openstack@lists.openstack.org">openstack@lists.openstack.org</a>><br>>>>>>>> Unsubscribe :<br>>>>>>>> <a href="http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack" target="_blank">http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack</a><br>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>><br>>>>>>><br>>>>>>> --<br>>>>>>> Sean Dague<br>>>>>>> <a href="http://dague.net" target="_blank">http://dague.net</a><br>>>>>><br>>>>>> _______________________________________________<br>>>>>> Mailing list:<br>>>>>> <a href="http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack" target="_blank">http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack</a><br>>>>>> Post to : <a href="mailto:openstack@lists.openstack.org">openstack@lists.openstack.org</a><br>>>>>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:openstack@lists.openstack.org">openstack@lists.openstack.org</a>><br>>>>>> Unsubscribe :<br>>>>>> <a href="http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack" target="_blank">http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack</a><br>>>>>><br>>>>>><br>>>>>><br>>>>>><br>>>>>><br>>>>>> _______________________________________________<br>>>>>> Mailing list:<br>>>> <a href="http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack" target="_blank">http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack</a><br>>>>>> Post to : <a href="mailto:openstack@lists.openstack.org">openstack@lists.openstack.org</a><br>>>>>> Unsubscribe :<br>>>>>> <a href="http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack" target="_blank">http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack</a><br>>>>>><br>>>>><br>>>>><br>>>>> _______________________________________________<br>>>>> Mailing list:<br>>>> <a href="http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack" target="_blank">http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack</a><br>>>>> Post to : <a href="mailto:openstack@lists.openstack.org">openstack@lists.openstack.org</a><br>>>>> Unsubscribe :<br>>>> <a href="http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack" target="_blank">http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack</a><br>>>><br>>>> _______________________________________________<br>>>> Mailing list:<br>> <a href="http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack" target="_blank">http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack</a><br>>>> Post to : <a href="mailto:openstack@lists.openstack.org">openstack@lists.openstack.org</a><br>>>> Unsubscribe :<br>>>> <a href="http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack" target="_blank">http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack</a><br>><br>> _______________________________________________<br>> Mailing list: <a href="http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack" target="_blank">http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack</a><br>> Post to : <a href="mailto:openstack@lists.openstack.org">openstack@lists.openstack.org</a><br>> Unsubscribe : <a href="http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack" target="_blank">http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack</a><br><br><br>_______________________________________________<br>Mailing list: <a href="http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack" target="_blank">http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack</a><br>Post to : <a href="mailto:openstack@lists.openstack.org">openstack@lists.openstack.org</a><br>Unsubscribe : <a href="http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack" target="_blank">http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack</a><o:p></o:p></p></div></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div></div></body></html>