[openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

Doug Hellmann doug at doughellmann.com
Thu Feb 25 14:54:11 UTC 2016

Excerpts from Jan Klare's message of 2016-02-25 15:29:08 +0100:
> > On 25 Feb 2016, at 13:39, Daniel P. Berrange <berrange at redhat.com> wrote:
> > 
> > On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 12:40:27PM +0100, Thierry Carrez wrote:
> >> Qiming Teng wrote:
> >>> [...]
> >>> Week 1:
> >>>  Wednesday-Friday: 3 days Summit.
> >>>    * Primarily an event for marketing, sales, CTOs, architects,
> >>>      operators, journalists, ...
> >>>    * Contributors can decide whether they want to attend this.
> >>>  Saturday-Sunday:
> >>>    * Social activities: contributors meet-up, hang outs ...
> >>> 
> >>> Week 2:
> >>>  Monday-Wednesday: 3 days Design Summit
> >>>    * Primarily an event for developers.
> >>>    * Operators can hold meetups during these days, or join project
> >>>      design summits.
> >>> 
> >>> If you need to attend both events, you don't need two trips. Scheduling
> >>> both events by the end of a release cycle can help gather more
> >>> meaningful feedbacks, experiences or lessons from previous releases and
> >>> ensure a better plan for the coming release.
> >>> 
> >>> If you want to attend just the main Summit or only the Design Summit,
> >>> you can plan your trip accordingly.
> >> 
> >> This was an option we considered. The main objection was that we are pretty
> >> burnt out and ready to go home when comes Friday on a single-week event, so
> >> the prospect of doing two consecutive weeks looked a bit like madness
> >> (especially considering ancillary events like upstream training, the board
> >> meeting etc. which tend to happen on the weekend before summit already). It
> >> felt like a good way to reduce our productivity and not make the most of the
> >> limited common time together. Furthermore it doesn't solve the issue of
> >> suboptimal timing as described in my original email.
> I do not think that the other suggestion of two different events solves the issues, but instead moves it to another suboptimal timing issue.
> > 
> > I'd wager a sizeable number of contributors would outright refuse to attend
> > an event for 2 weeks. 6-7 days away from family is already a long time. As
> > such, I would certainly never do any event which spanned 2 weeks, even if
> > both weeks were relevant to my work.
> I don’t think that the suggestion here was to create an event spanning two full weeks. As far as i understand it, the OpenStack summit itself would span nearly the exact same time as before and maybe even less if you decide that you do not want to attend the main summit (or only a part of it), but just the design one (or only a part of it). In addition to that, i think the suggestion of 3 days in the first week and 3 days in the following one is just something we can start a discussion about. I think it would be enough to just have a 2 day main event (maybe Monday and Tuesday) and schedule the design summit with 2 or 3 days directly after that (Wednesday to Thursday or Friday).

For most folks the summit now is a work week + 2 days for travel
on either side of it, or at least 7 days (some of us travel further
than others). Spreading it across 7 full days like this would mean
at least 9 days for anyone who needs to be present for the entire
event. Given that many technical folks do also need to be present
for the conference portion of the event to meet with customers, I
think there would likely be quite a few folks for whom this would
turn into a very long, tiring, trip where productivity would drop off
steeply near the middle.

As Thierry pointed out, it's a bit questionable whether there's
actually much savings for participants with the extended event.
Anyone attending only one half will still need to fly to and stay
in the more expensive venues we're using now, so they save nothing.
Anyone attending both halves may save the cost of one airline ticket,
unless they're going to mid-cycles which we wouldn't be able to
eliminate. In which case extending the event *increases* their costs
because they end up staying in the more expensive hotel for more

We also have to consider the extra difficulty and expense of trying
to book a venue for such an extended time (considering set up and
tear down time we need it for longer than we'll be actively using
it, even if not by a lot).


> Cheers,
> Jan
> > 
> > 
> > Regards,
> > Daniel
> > -- 
> > |: http://berrange.com <http://berrange.com/>      -o-    http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ <http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/>:|
> > |: http://libvirt.org <http://libvirt.org/>              -o-             http://virt-manager.org <http://virt-manager.org/> :|
> > |: http://autobuild.org <http://autobuild.org/>       -o-         http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ <http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/> :|
> > |: http://entangle-photo.org <http://entangle-photo.org/>       -o-       http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc <http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc> :|
> > 
> > __________________________________________________________________________
> > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> > Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org <mailto:OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org>?subject:unsubscribe
> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev <http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev>

More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list