I've now gone through and done the post summit cleanup of blueprints and migration of design docs into blueprints as appropriate. We had 50 odd blueprints, many of where were really not effective blueprints - they described single work items with little coordination need, were not changelog items, etc. I've marked those obsolete. Blueprints are not a discussion forum - they are a place that [some] discussions can be captured, but anything initially filed there will take some time before folk notice it - and the lack of a discussion mechanism makes it very hard to reach consensus there. Could TripleO interested folk please raise things here, on the dev list initially, and we'll move it to lower latency // higher bandwidth environments as needed? >From the summit we had the following outcomes https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/icehouse-deployment-hardware-autodiscovery - needs to be done in ironic https://blueprints.launchpad.net/tripleo/+spec/tripleo-icehouse-modelling-infrastructure-sla-services - needs more discussion to tease concerns out - in particular I want us to get to a problem statement that Nova core folk understand :) https://blueprints.launchpad.net/tripleo/+spec/tripleo-icehouse-ha-production-configuration - this is ready for folk to act on at any point https://blueprints.launchpad.net/tripleo/+spec/tripleo-tuskar-deployment-scaling-topologies - this is ready for folk to act on - but it's fairly shallow, since most of the answer was 'discuss with heat' :) https://blueprints.launchpad.net/tripleo/+spec/tripleo-icehouse-scaling-design - this is ready for folk to act on; the main thing was gathering a bunch of data so we can make good decisions from here on out The stable branches decision has been documented in the wiki - all done. Cheers, Rob -- Robert Collins <rbtcollins at hp.com> Distinguished Technologist HP Converged Cloud