Open Stack

Hi Susanne--

Regarding the Octavia sessions:  I think we probably will have enough to
discuss that we could use two design sessions.  However, I also think that
we can probably come to conclusions on whether Octavia should become a part
of Neutron Incubator right away via discussion on this mailing list.  Do we
want to have that discussion in another thread, or should we use this one?

Stephen


On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 7:51 AM, Susanne Balle <sleipnir012 at gmail.com>
wrote:

> With a corrected Subject. Susanne
>
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 10:49 AM, Susanne Balle <sleipnir012 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>> LBaaS team,
>>
>> As we discussed in the Weekly LBaaS meeting this morning we should make
>> sure we get the design sessions scheduled that we are interested in.
>>
>> We currently agreed on the following:
>>
>> * Neutron LBaaS. we want to schedule 2 sessions. I am assuming that we
>> want to go over status and also the whole incubator thingy and how we will
>> best move forward.
>>
>> * Octavia: We want to schedule 2 sessions.
>> ---  During one of the sessions I would like to discuss the pros and cons
>> of putting Octavia into the Neutron LBaaS incubator project right away. If
>> it is going to be the reference implementation for LBaaS v 2 then I believe
>> Octavia belong in Neutron LBaaS v2 incubator.
>>
>> * Flavors which should be coordinated with markmcclain and enikanorov.
>> --- https://review.openstack.org/#/c/102723/
>>
>> Is this too many sessions given the constraints? I am assuming that we
>> can also meet at the pods like we did at the last summit.
>>
>> thoughts?
>>
>> Regards Susanne
>>
>> Thierry Carrez <thierry at openstack.org>
>> Aug 27 (1 day ago)
>>  to OpenStack
>>  Hi everyone,
>>
>> I've been thinking about what changes we can bring to the Design Summit
>> format to make it more productive. I've heard the feedback from the
>> mid-cycle meetups and would like to apply some of those ideas for Paris,
>> within the constraints we have (already booked space and time). Here is
>> something we could do:
>>
>> Day 1. Cross-project sessions / incubated projects / other projects
>>
>> I think that worked well last time. 3 parallel rooms where we can
>> address top cross-project questions, discuss the results of the various
>> experiments we conducted during juno. Don't hesitate to schedule 2 slots
>> for discussions, so that we have time to come to the bottom of those
>> issues. Incubated projects (and maybe "other" projects, if space allows)
>> occupy the remaining space on day 1, and could occupy "pods" on the
>> other days.
>>
>> Day 2 and Day 3. Scheduled sessions for various programs
>>
>> That's our traditional scheduled space. We'll have a 33% less slots
>> available. So, rather than trying to cover all the scope, the idea would
>> be to focus those sessions on specific issues which really require
>> face-to-face discussion (which can't be solved on the ML or using spec
>> discussion) *or* require a lot of user feedback. That way, appearing in
>> the general schedule is very helpful. This will require us to be a lot
>> stricter on what we accept there and what we don't -- we won't have
>> space for courtesy sessions anymore, and traditional/unnecessary
>> sessions (like my traditional "release schedule" one) should just move
>> to the mailing-list.
>>
>> Day 4. Contributors meetups
>>
>> On the last day, we could try to split the space so that we can conduct
>> parallel midcycle-meetup-like contributors gatherings, with no time
>> boundaries and an open agenda. Large projects could get a full day,
>> smaller projects would get half a day (but could continue the discussion
>> in a local bar). Ideally that meetup would end with some alignment on
>> release goals, but the idea is to make the best of that time together to
>> solve the issues you have. Friday would finish with the design summit
>> feedback session, for those who are still around.
>>
>>
>> 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.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>


-- 
Stephen Balukoff
Blue Box Group, LLC
(800)613-4305 x807
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20140828/35b15e16/attachment.html>