Open Stack

On 11/16/2015 03:05 PM, Jim Rollenhagen wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 12:16:34PM -0500, Ruby Loo wrote:
>> On 10 November 2015 at 12:08, Dmitry Tantsur <dtantsur at redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 11/10/2015 05:45 PM, Lucas Alvares Gomes wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> In the last Ironic meeting [1] we started a discussion about whether
>>>> we need to have a mid-cycle meeting for the Mitaka cycle or not. Some
>>>> ideas about the format of the midcycle were presented in that
>>>> conversation and this email is just a follow up on that conversation.
>>>>
>>>> The ideas presented were:
>>>>
>>>> 1. Normal mid-cycle
>>>>
>>>> Same format as the previous ones, the meetup will happen in a specific
>>>> venue somewhere in the world.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I would really want to see you all as often as possible. However, I don't
>>> see much value in proper face-to-face mid-cycles as compared to improving
>>> our day-to-day online communications.
>>
>>
>> +2.
>>
>> My take on mid-cycles is that if folks want to have one, that is fine, I
>> might not attend :)
>>
>> My preference is 4) no mid-cycle -- and try to work more effectively with
>> people in different locations and time zones.
>
> ++ that was part of my thought process when I proposed not having an
> official midcycle.
>
> Another idea I floated last week was to do a virtual midcycle of sorts.
> Treat it like a normal midcycle in that everyone tells their management
> "I'm out for 3-4 days for the midcycle", but they don't travel anywhere.
> We come up with an agenda, see if there's any planning/syncing work to
> do, or if it's all just hacking on code/reviews.
>
> Then we can set up some hangouts (or similar) to get people in the same
> "room" working on things. Time zones will get weird, but we tend to
> split into smaller groups at the midcycle anyway; this is just more
> timezone-aligned. We can also find windows where time zones overlap when
> we want to go across those boundaries. Disclaimer: people may need to
> work some weird hours to do this well.
>
> I think this might get a little bit bumpy, but if it goes relatively
> well we can try to improve on it for the future. Worst case, it's a
> total failure and is roughly equivalent to the "no midcycle" option.

I would try it, +1

>
> // jim
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>