<html><head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head><body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">Christopher,<br>
<br>
We might be able to lend a hand with the authentication piece if you're
able to use OpenStackID. <br>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://docs.openstack.org/infra/system-config/openstackid.html">http://docs.openstack.org/infra/system-config/openstackid.html</a><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://github.com/openstack-infra/openstackid">https://github.com/openstack-infra/openstackid</a><br>
<br>
If this is something you're interested in, let me know. I believe we can
help you out.<br>
<br>
Thanks!<br>
Jimmy McArthur<br>
<blockquote style="border: 0px none;"
cite="mid:CA+odVQF0GtwJFKXVziH0b6MzUq2tvBGMqo99Utgo9EVvvznHAw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div style="margin:30px 25px 10px 25px;" class="__pbConvHr"><div
style="width:100%;border-top:1px solid #EDEEF0;padding-top:5px"> <div
style="display:inline-block;white-space:nowrap;vertical-align:middle;width:49%;">
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:doc@aedo.net"
style="color:#737F92
!important;padding-right:6px;font-weight:bold;text-decoration:none
!important;">Christopher Aedo</a></div> <div
style="display:inline-block;white-space:nowrap;vertical-align:middle;width:48%;text-align:
right;"> <font color="#9FA2A5"><span style="padding-left:6px">September
7, 2016 at 2:34 AM</span></font></div> </div></div>
<div style="color:#888888;margin-left:24px;margin-right:24px;"
__pbrmquotes="true" class="__pbConvBody"><pre wrap="">On Mon, Sep 5, 2016 at 3:24 PM, Blair Bethwaite
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:blair.bethwaite@monash.edu"><blair.bethwaite@monash.edu></a> wrote:
</pre><blockquote type="cite"><pre wrap="">Hi Flanders,
Great discussion. Prompted me to go remind myself of the role and/or
definition of an OS UC Working Group... I didn't find anything "formal", but
w.o.o/UserCommittee says:
=====
The user committee's role is to represent the needs of the diverse range of
OpenStack users. The user committee is advised by Working Groups, each of
whom represents different user audiences and interests.
The user committee mission is to:
Consolidate user requirements and present these to the management board and
technical committee[1].
Provide guidance for the development teams where user feedback is requested
Track OpenStack deployments and usage, helping to share user stories and
experiences
Work with the user groups worldwide to keep the OpenStack community vibrant
and informed
=====
>From the WG activity perspective I would highlight it is very
useful/important to have some direction (as well as support) coming from the
UC - I think our experience with the scientific-wg is roughly that we have a
large interest base and plenty of people who find good value in talking to
and sharing with their peers, but it is quite hard to turn that into
concrete forward momentum or to even mint well articulated goals from within
the group.
On engagement, IRC is useful for reasons already mentioned in this thread
(and we've been fortunate to have some valuable interactions thanks some
core devs having keyword watches setup on OpenStack channels), but I think
we alienate and/or make things too hard for some potential contributors. And
I don't think it makes a great watercooler discussion tool (e.g. no offline
history etc without setting up a bouncer - and that is fairly opaque even
for a CS major).
</pre></blockquote><pre wrap=""><!---->
I'm a huge fan of the way we use IRC in the OpenStack community, but
have also recognized getting up and running with a persistent IRC
connection can pose a significant barrier to many very smart and
technically sharp humans. To that end I wrote a spec to provide a
hosted, persistent IRC web-client [1]. Lately however the effort has
been stalled due to my lack of experience with JS; if we can find
someone who can plumb in the auth piece, we could be up and running
with this fairly quickly.
I think getting that right will be worth the effort, and could get a
whole lot more people engaged across all our various domains.
[1] <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://review.openstack.org/319506">https://review.openstack.org/319506</a>
-Christopher
</pre><blockquote type="cite"><pre wrap="">Having (myself) done a fairly woeful job of keeping pace with the dev side
of OS progression this cycle I'm also interested in exploring ways of
highlighting activities/work that may be of interest to any particular WG.
The first thing that springs to mind is tagging of blueprints and reviews,
e.g., where a dev or other community member is looking for
input/support/resolution from a specific target user group. This could be a
mechanism we as chairs utilise to surface agenda items, solicit input and
then respond on behalf of the group.
Cheers,
Blair
On 30 August 2016 at 10:36, David F Flanders <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:flanders@openstack.org"><flanders@openstack.org></a> wrote:
</pre><blockquote type="cite"><pre wrap="">Dear Working Group Co-Chairs and User Committee Chairs,
The logistical tasks of running a WG meeting is by no means trivial,
here a quick list of things which a co-chairs of a WG do on a weekly
basis to run a global meeting:
a.) mint calendar invitation to all members (subscribe/unsubscribe
members)
b.) call for agenda items via etherpad
c.) update wiki with upcoming meeting and link to etherpad agenda
d.) email user-committee mailing list on when next meeting is
occurring along with agenda links
e.) assure meeting channel is confirmed (irc/phone/etc)
f.) run meeting according to good practices (irc etiquette or well
taken notes if via voice)
g.) post meeting follow up: circulating actions, posting meeting
notes, taking any outstanding queries to the mailing list for
consideration, etc.
h.) follow up actions.
i.) recruit new members
j.) plan for summit meetings
k.) etc etc.
All of the above are sometimes done twice-over at different times to
help maintain the conversation in different timezones.
In addition, the groups are still not well attended by as diverse an
audience as OpenStack represents. AsiaPac, Latin America, India and
other massive OpenStack user groups have not yet engaged despite some
of their massive communities.
One of the recent suggestions has been to converge some of the WGs to
help ease the burden of these logistical tasks.
Other options include:
* having a more systematic approach to when WG occur, i.e. agreeing
a set pattern such s a day per fortnight which each WG happens (one
after another).
* having a shared IRC channel for all WG activity to help create
more water-cooler conversation between chairs?
* sharing of logistical duties between WG chairs, etc
Options abound, though discussion much needed!
Q: Is there any good practice we can draw from? I've been digging
around my old W3C and IETF notes to see what good practice there may
be?
Discussion/replies greatly appreciated to see if there is any consensus?
Kind Regards,
Flanders
</pre></blockquote><pre wrap="">--
Blair Bethwaite
Senior HPC Consultant
Monash eResearch Centre
Monash University
Room G26, 15 Innovation Walk, Clayton Campus
Clayton VIC 3800
Australia
Mobile: 0439-545-002
Office: +61 3-9903-2800
_______________________________________________
User-committee mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:User-committee@lists.openstack.org">User-committee@lists.openstack.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/user-committee">http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/user-committee</a>
</pre></blockquote><pre wrap=""><!---->
_______________________________________________
User-committee mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:User-committee@lists.openstack.org">User-committee@lists.openstack.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/user-committee">http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/user-committee</a>
</pre></div>
<div style="margin:30px 25px 10px 25px;" class="__pbConvHr"><div
style="width:100%;border-top:1px solid #EDEEF0;padding-top:5px"> <div
style="display:inline-block;white-space:nowrap;vertical-align:middle;width:49%;">
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:blair.bethwaite@monash.edu"
style="color:#737F92
!important;padding-right:6px;font-weight:bold;text-decoration:none
!important;">Blair Bethwaite</a></div> <div
style="display:inline-block;white-space:nowrap;vertical-align:middle;width:48%;text-align:
right;"> <font color="#9FA2A5"><span style="padding-left:6px">September
5, 2016 at 5:24 PM</span></font></div> </div></div>
<div style="color:#888888;margin-left:24px;margin-right:24px;"
__pbrmquotes="true" class="__pbConvBody"><p dir="ltr">Hi Flanders,</p>
<p dir="ltr">Great discussion. Prompted me to go remind myself of the
role and/or definition of an OS UC Working Group... I didn't find
anything "formal", but w.o.o/UserCommittee says:<br>
=====<br>
The user committee's role is to represent the needs of the diverse range
of OpenStack users. The user committee is advised by Working Groups,
each of whom represents different user audiences and interests.</p>
<p dir="ltr">The user committee mission is to:</p>
<p dir="ltr">Consolidate user requirements and present these to the
management board and technical committee[1].<br>
Provide guidance for the development teams where user feedback is
requested<br>
Track OpenStack deployments and usage, helping to share user stories and
experiences<br>
Work with the user groups worldwide to keep the OpenStack community
vibrant and informed<br>
=====</p>
<p dir="ltr">From the WG activity perspective I would highlight it is
very useful/important to have some direction (as well as support) coming
from the UC - I think our experience with the scientific-wg is roughly
that we have a large interest base and plenty of people who find good
value in talking to and sharing with their peers, but it is quite hard
to turn that into concrete forward momentum or to even mint well
articulated goals from within the group.</p>
<p dir="ltr">On engagement, IRC is useful for reasons already mentioned
in this thread (and we've been fortunate to have some valuable
interactions thanks some core devs having keyword watches setup on
OpenStack channels), but I think we alienate and/or make things too hard
for some potential contributors. And I don't think it makes a great
watercooler discussion tool (e.g. no offline history etc without setting
up a bouncer - and that is fairly opaque even for a CS major).</p>
<p dir="ltr">Having (myself) done a fairly woeful job of keeping pace
with the dev side of OS progression this cycle I'm also interested in
exploring ways of highlighting activities/work that may be of interest
to any particular WG. The first thing that springs to mind is tagging of
blueprints and reviews, e.g., where a dev or other community member is
looking for input/support/resolution from a specific target user group.
This could be a mechanism we as chairs utilise to surface agenda items,
solicit input and then respond on behalf of the group.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Cheers,<br>
Blair</p>
<p dir="ltr">On 30 August 2016 at 10:36, David F Flanders <<a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:flanders@openstack.org">flanders@openstack.org</a>>
wrote:<br>
> Dear Working Group Co-Chairs and User Committee Chairs,<br>
><br>
> The logistical tasks of running a WG meeting is by no means
trivial,<br>
> here a quick list of things which a co-chairs of a WG do on a
weekly<br>
> basis to run a global meeting:<br>
><br>
> a.) mint calendar invitation to all members (subscribe/unsubscribe
members)<br>
> b.) call for agenda items via etherpad<br>
> c.) update wiki with upcoming meeting and link to etherpad agenda<br>
> d.) email user-committee mailing list on when next meeting is<br>
> occurring along with agenda links<br>
> e.) assure meeting channel is confirmed (irc/phone/etc)<br>
> f.) run meeting according to good practices (irc etiquette or well<br>
> taken notes if via voice)<br>
> g.) post meeting follow up: circulating actions, posting meeting<br>
> notes, taking any outstanding queries to the mailing list for<br>
> consideration, etc.<br>
> h.) follow up actions.<br>
> i.) recruit new members<br>
> j.) plan for summit meetings<br>
> k.) etc etc.<br>
><br>
> All of the above are sometimes done twice-over at different times
to<br>
> help maintain the conversation in different timezones.<br>
><br>
> In addition, the groups are still not well attended by as diverse
an<br>
> audience as OpenStack represents. AsiaPac, Latin America, India and<br>
> other massive OpenStack user groups have not yet engaged despite
some<br>
> of their massive communities.<br>
><br>
> One of the recent suggestions has been to converge some of the WGs
to<br>
> help ease the burden of these logistical tasks.<br>
><br>
> Other options include:<br>
><br>
> * having a more systematic approach to when WG occur, i.e. agreeing<br>
> a set pattern such s a day per fortnight which each WG happens (one<br>
> after another).<br>
><br>
> * having a shared IRC channel for all WG activity to help create<br>
> more water-cooler conversation between chairs?<br>
><br>
> * sharing of logistical duties between WG chairs, etc<br>
><br>
> Options abound, though discussion much needed!<br>
><br>
> Q: Is there any good practice we can draw from? I've been digging<br>
> around my old W3C and IETF notes to see what good practice there
may<br>
> be?<br>
><br>
> Discussion/replies greatly appreciated to see if there is any
consensus?<br>
><br>
> Kind Regards,<br>
><br>
> Flanders</p>
<p dir="ltr">-- <br>
Blair Bethwaite<br>
Senior HPC Consultant</p>
<p dir="ltr">Monash eResearch Centre<br>
Monash University<br>
Room G26, 15 Innovation Walk, Clayton Campus<br>
Clayton VIC 3800<br>
Australia<br>
Mobile: 0439-545-002<br>
Office:<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="tel:%2B61%203-9903-2800"> +61
3-9903-2800</a></p>
<div>_______________________________________________<br>User-committee
mailing list<br><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:User-committee@lists.openstack.org">User-committee@lists.openstack.org</a><br><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/user-committee">http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/user-committee</a><br></div></div>
<div style="margin:30px 25px 10px 25px;" class="__pbConvHr"><div
style="width:100%;border-top:1px solid #EDEEF0;padding-top:5px"> <div
style="display:inline-block;white-space:nowrap;vertical-align:middle;width:49%;">
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:flanders@openstack.org"
style="color:#737F92
!important;padding-right:6px;font-weight:bold;text-decoration:none
!important;">David F Flanders</a></div> <div
style="display:inline-block;white-space:nowrap;vertical-align:middle;width:48%;text-align:
right;"> <font color="#9FA2A5"><span style="padding-left:6px">August
29, 2016 at 7:36 PM</span></font></div> </div></div>
<div style="color:#888888;margin-left:24px;margin-right:24px;"
__pbrmquotes="true" class="__pbConvBody"><div>Dear Working Group
Co-Chairs and User Committee Chairs,<br><br>The logistical tasks of
running a WG meeting is by no means trivial,<br>here a quick list of
things which a co-chairs of a WG do on a weekly<br>basis to run a global
meeting:<br><br>a.) mint calendar invitation to all members
(subscribe/unsubscribe members)<br>b.) call for agenda items via
etherpad<br>c.) update wiki with upcoming meeting and link to etherpad
agenda<br>d.) email user-committee mailing list on when next meeting is<br>occurring
along with agenda links<br>e.) assure meeting channel is confirmed
(irc/phone/etc)<br>f.) run meeting according to good practices (irc
etiquette or well<br>taken notes if via voice)<br>g.) post meeting
follow up: circulating actions, posting meeting<br>notes, taking any
outstanding queries to the mailing list for<br>consideration, etc.<br>h.)
follow up actions.<br>i.) recruit new members<br>j.) plan for summit
meetings<br>k.) etc etc.<br><br>All of the above are sometimes done
twice-over at different times to<br>help maintain the conversation in
different timezones.<br><br>In addition, the groups are still not well
attended by as diverse an<br>audience as OpenStack represents. AsiaPac,
Latin America, India and<br>other massive OpenStack user groups have
not yet engaged despite some<br>of their massive communities.<br><br>One
of the recent suggestions has been to converge some of the WGs to<br>help
ease the burden of these logistical tasks.<br><br>Other options
include:<br><br> * having a more systematic approach to when WG occur,
i.e. agreeing<br>a set pattern such s a day per fortnight which each WG
happens (one<br>after another).<br><br> * having a shared IRC channel
for all WG activity to help create<br>more water-cooler conversation
between chairs?<br><br> * sharing of logistical duties between WG
chairs, etc<br><br>Options abound, though discussion much needed!<br><br>Q:
Is there any good practice we can draw from? I've been digging<br>around
my old W3C and IETF notes to see what good practice there may<br>be?<br><br>Discussion/replies
greatly appreciated to see if there is any consensus?<br><br>Kind
Regards,<br><br>Flanders<br><br>_______________________________________________<br>User-committee
mailing list<br><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:User-committee@lists.openstack.org">User-committee@lists.openstack.org</a><br><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/user-committee">http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/user-committee</a><br></div></div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body></html>