Open Stack

On 08/28/2014 03:31 PM, Sean Dague wrote:
> On 08/28/2014 03:06 PM, Jay Pipes wrote:
>> On 08/28/2014 02:21 PM, Sean Dague wrote:
>>> On 08/28/2014 01:58 PM, Jay Pipes wrote:
>>>> On 08/27/2014 11:34 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Aug 27, 2014, at 8:51 AM, Thierry Carrez <thierry at openstack.org>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> 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.
>>>>>
>>>>> If anything, I’d like to have fewer cross-project tracks running
>>>>> simultaneously. Depending on which are proposed, maybe we can make
>>>>> that happen. On the other hand, cross-project issues is a big theme
>>>>> right now so maybe we should consider devoting more than a day to
>>>>> dealing with them.
>>>>
>>>> I agree with Doug here. I'd almost say having a single cross-project
>>>> room, with serialized content would be better than 3 separate
>>>> cross-project tracks. By nature, the cross-project sessions will attract
>>>> developers that work or are interested in a set of projects that looks
>>>> like a big Venn diagram. By having 3 separate cross-project tracks, we
>>>> would increase the likelihood that developers would once more have to
>>>> choose among simultaneous sessions that they have equal interest in. For
>>>> Infra and QA folks, this likelihood is even greater...
>>>>
>>>> I think I'd prefer a single cross-project track on the first day.
>>>
>>> So the fallout of that is there will be 6 or 7 cross-project slots for
>>> the design summit. Maybe that's the right mix if the TC does a good job
>>> picking the top 5 things we want accomplished from a cross project
>>> standpoint during the cycle. But it's going to have to be a pretty
>>> directed pick. I think last time we had 21 slots, and with a couple of
>>> doubling up that gave 19 sessions. (about 30 - 35 proposals for that
>>> slot set).
>>
>> I'm not sure that would be a bad thing :)
>>
>> I think one of the reasons the mid-cycles have been successful is that
>> they have adequately limited the scope of discussions and I think by
>> doing our homework by fully vetting and voting on cross-project sessions
>> and being OK with saying "No, not this time.", we will be more
>> productive than if we had 20+ cross-project sessions.
>>
>> Just my two cents, though..
>
> I'm not sure it would be a bad thing either. I just wanted to be
> explicit about what we are saying the cross projects sessions are for in
> this case: the 5 key cross project activities the TC believes should be
> worked on this next cycle.

Yes.

> The other question is if we did that what's running in competition to
> cross project day? Is it another free form pod day for people not
> working on those things?

It could be a pod day, sure. Or just an extended hallway session day... :)

-jay