Open Stack

On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 10:30:59AM -0500, Kyle Mestery wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 10:13 AM, Sandy Walsh <sandy.walsh at rackspace.com> wrote:
> > On 8/14/2014 11:28 AM, Russell Bryant wrote:
> >> On 08/14/2014 10:04 AM, CARVER, PAUL wrote:
> >>> Daniel P. Berrange [mailto:berrange at redhat.com] wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Depending on the usage needs, I think Google hangouts is a quite useful
> >>>> technology. For many-to-many session its limit of 10 participants can be
> >>>> an issue, but for a few-to-many broadcast it could be practical. What I
> >>>> find particularly appealing is the way it can live stream the session
> >>>> over youtube which allows for unlimited number of viewers, as well as
> >>>> being available offline for later catchup.
> >>> I can't actually offer AT&T resources without getting some level of
> >>> management approval first, but just for the sake of discussion here's
> >>> some info about the telepresence system we use.
> >>>
> >>> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> >>> ATS B2B Telepresence conferences can be conducted with an external company's
> >>> Telepresence room(s), which subscribe to the AT&T Telepresence Solution,
> >>> or a limited number of other Telepresence service provider's networks.
> >>>
> >>> Currently, the number of Telepresence rooms that can participate in a B2B
> >>> conference is limited to a combined total of 20 rooms (19 of which can be
> >>> AT&T rooms, depending on the number of remote endpoints included).
> >>> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> >>>
> >>> We currently have B2B interconnect with over 100 companies and AT&T has
> >>> telepresence rooms in many of our locations around the US and around
> >>> the world. If other large OpenStack companies also have telepresence
> >>> rooms that we could interconnect with I think it might be possible
> >>> to get management agreement to hold a couple OpenStack meetups per
> >>> year.
> >>>
> >>> Most of our rooms are best suited for 6 people, but I know of at least
> >>> one 18 person telepresence room near me.
> >> An ideal solution would allow attendees to join as individuals from
> >> anywhere.  A lot of contributors work from home.  Is that sort of thing
> >> compatible with your system?
> >>
> > http://bluejeans.com/ was a good experience.
> >
> > What about Google Hangout OnAir for the PTL and core, while others are
> > view-only with chat/irc questions?
> >
> This is a terrible idea, as it perpetuates the "core vs. non-core"
> argument. We need equal participation for cores and non-cores alike.

Yeah I think we'd have to be careful about doing such a distinct
split in participation between groups of people. I think the idea
of some people full-access, others view-only will only be viable
for those discussions where it was focused as an information
dissemination event. eg 1 or a handful of people presenting some
kind of proposal / problem, and then have the interactive
discussion part in a more broadly inclusive arena like IRC or
email. Or if there were discussions which are inherantly core
only work already so that there wasn't an expectation of more
general non-core attendance.

Regards,
Daniel
-- 
|: http://berrange.com      -o-    http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :|
|: http://libvirt.org              -o-             http://virt-manager.org :|
|: http://autobuild.org       -o-         http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|: http://entangle-photo.org       -o-       http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|