[openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit
chris.friesen at windriver.com
Tue Mar 1 21:30:00 UTC 2016
On 03/01/2016 09:03 AM, Anita Kuno wrote:
> On 03/01/2016 05:08 AM, Eoghan Glynn wrote:
>>>>> In Vancouver I happened to be sitting behind someone who stated "I'm
>>>>> just here for the buzz." Which is lovely for that person. The problem is
>>>>> that the buzz that person is there for is partially created by me and I
>>>>> create it and mean to offer it to people who will return it in kind, not
>>>>> just soak it up and keep it to themselves.
>>>> I don't know if drive-by attendance at design summit sessions by under-
>>>> qualified or uninformed summiteers is encouraged by the availability of
>>>> ATC passes. But as long as those individuals aren't actively derailing
>>>> the conversation in sessions, I wouldn't consider their buzz soakage as
>>>> a major issue TBH.
>>> Folks who want to help (even if they don't know how yet) carry an energy
>>> of intention with them which is nourishing to be around. Folks who are
>>> trying to get in the door and not be expected to help and hope noone
>>> notices carry an entirely different kind of energy with them. It is a
>>> non-nourishing energy.
>> Personally I don't buy into that notion of the wrong sort of people
>> sneaking in the door of summit, keeping their heads down and hoping
>> no-one notices.
>> TBH we should be flattered that the design
>> summit sessions are interesting and engaging enough to also attract
>> some of that sort of audience, as well as the core contributors of
>> code. If those interested folks happen to also have the gumption to
>> earn an ATC pass by meeting the threshold for contributor activity,
>> then good for them! As long as no-one is actively derailing the
>> discussion, I don't see much of an issue with the current mix of
> Yeah, I don't feel you have understood what my point is, and that is
> fine. We did put forward an attempt to communicate and it failed. We
> will have other opportunities on other issues in the future.
I don't think it's so much a failure to communicate, but rather simply a failure
to arrive at a consensus. As I see it, Eoghan understands your point but does
not feel the same way.
More information about the OpenStack-dev