Open Stack

Zane Bitter wrote:
> [...]
> Here are a few of the conclusions:
> 
> * Everyone wishes the Design Summit worked like this.
> The meetup seemed a lot more productive than the design summit ever is.
> It's really nice to be in a room small enough that you can talk normally
> and hear everyone, instead of in a room designed for 150 people. It's
> really nice to be able to discuss stuff that isn't related to a
> particular feature - we had a long discussion about how to get through
> the review backlog, for example. It's really nice to not have fixed time
> slots for discussions - because everyone was in the room the whole time,
> we could dip in and out of different topics at will. Often we came back
> to one that we'd previously discussed because we had discovered new
> information. Finally, it's critical to be in a room covered in
> full-sized whiteboards that everyone can see. A single tiny flip chart
> doesn't cut it.

That's good feedback, thanks. The current discussion on design summit
format changes is a bit lost under a Nova thread, so I should revive it
as a separate thread very soon. The idea being to implement whatever
changes we can to the summit to make it more productive (in the limited
remaining time and options we have for that).

> [...]
> * Marc^W Zaqar is critical to pretty much every major non-Convergence
> feature on the roadmap.
> We knew that we wanted to use it for notifications, but we also want to
> make those a replacement for events, and a conduit for warnings and
> debugging information to the user. This is becoming so important that
> we're going to push ahead with an implementation now without waiting to
> see when Zaqar will graduate. Zaqar would also be a good candidate for
> pushing metadata changes to servers, to resolve the performance issues
> currently caused by polling.

Could you expand on that ? Do you need some kind of user-facing queue
service, or is there something in the marc^WZaqar approach that makes it
especially appealing ?

-- 
Thierry Carrez (ttx)