Open Stack

Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 02:51:55PM +0200, Thierry Carrez wrote:
>> [...]
>> I think this proposal makes the best use of our setup: discuss clear
>> cross-project issues, address key specific topics which need
>> face-to-face time and broader attendance, then try to replicate the
>> success of midcycle meetup-like open unscheduled time to discuss
>> whatever is hot at this point.
>>
>> There are still details to work out (is it possible split the space,
>> should we use the usual design summit CFP website to organize the
>> "scheduled" time...), but I would first like to have your feedback on
>> this format. Also if you have alternative proposals that would make a
>> better use of our 4 days, let me know.
> 
> +1, I think what you've proposed is a pretty attractive evolution of
> our previous design summit formats. I figure it is safer trying such
> an evolutionary approach for Paris, rather than trying to make too
> much of a "big bang" revolution at one time. 

We have too many fixed constraints at this time for a "big bang" anyway.

What I like in the format is that the nature of the 4th day can change
completely based on the result of the 3 previous days. If a major topic
emerged, you can address it. If a continuation discussion is needed, you
can have it. If you are completely drained of any energy, you can spend
a quiet time together with a lighter agenda, or no agenda	at all.

It would still be open for everyone, but the placement (Friday) and
title in the schedule ("X contributors gathering") should feel
unattractive enough so that attendance is generally smaller and more
on-topic. We'll likely have to split rooms, so people who have been
complaining about giant rooms being detrimental should be happy too.

-- 
Thierry Carrez (ttx)