Open Stack

Kendall,

I would like to be the Trove liaison, and would like to participate in
Upstream University next time around.

With that said, the answers to Sean's original question.

I ran the room for the Trove team, I think it was a welcome addition.

What went well: I think it was a good opportunity for the project to get
new contributors (update: if you are interested in contributing to an
openstack project, trove is looking for new participants).

It would have been nice to have them video taped.

-amrith


-amrith

--
Amrith Kumar
Phone: +1-978-563-9590


On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 6:20 PM, Kendall Nelson <kennelson11 at gmail.com>
wrote:

> @Nikhil, we (the organizers of Upstream Institute) sent a few emails
> [1][2] out to the dev mailing list asking for help and representatives from
> various projects to attend and get involved. We are also working on
> building a network of project liaisons to direct newcomers to in each
> project. Would you be interested in being our Glance liaison?
>
> Let me know if you have any other Upstream Institute questions!
>
> - Kendall(diablo_rojo)
>
> [1] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2017-
> January/110788.html
> [2]  http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2016-
> November/108084.html
>
> On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 4:03 PM Nikhil Komawar <nik.komawar at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Project:  Glance
>>
>> Attendees: ~15
>>
>> What was done:
>>
>> We started by introducing the core team (or whatever existed then), did a
>> run down of Glance API documentation especially for developers, other
>> references like notes for ops, best practices. We went through the
>> architecture of the project. A few were interested in knowing more details
>> and going in depth so we discussed the design patterns that exist today,
>> scope of improvements and any blackholes therein, auxiliary services and
>> performance tradeoffs etc. A lot of the discussion was free form so people
>> asked questions and session was interactive.
>>
>>
>> What worked:
>>
>> 1. The projector worked!
>>
>> 2. Session was free form, there was good turnout and it was interactive.
>> (all the good things)
>>
>> 3. People were serious about contributing as per their
>> availability/capacity to do upstream and one person showed up asking to do
>> reviews.
>>
>>
>> Lessons:
>>
>> 1. Could have been advertised more at least the session description more
>> customized.
>>
>> 2. A representative from the team could have been officially invited to
>> the upstream institute training.
>>
>> 3. The community building sessions and on-boarding sessions seem to
>> overlap a bit so a representative from the team could be help in those
>> sessions for Q&A or more interaction. Probably more collaboration/prep
>> before the summit for such things. ($0.02)
>>
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 1:27 PM, Jay S Bryant <jungleboyj at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Project:  Cinder
>>>
>>> Attendees: Approximately 30
>>>
>>> I was really pleased by the number of people that attended the Cinder
>>> session and the fact that they people in the room seemed engaged with the
>>> presentation and asked good questions showing interest in the project.  I
>>> think having the on-boardings rooms was beneficial and hopefully something
>>> that we can continue.
>>>
>>> Given the number of people in the room we didn't go around and introduce
>>> everyone.  I did have the Sean McGinnis introduce himself as PTL and had
>>> the other Cinder Core members introduce themselves so that the attendees
>>> could put faces with our names.
>>>
>>> From there we kicked off the presentation [1] which covered the
>>> following high level topics:
>>>
>>>    - Introduction of Cinder's Repos and components
>>>    - Quick overview of Cinder's architecture/organization
>>>    - Pointers to the Upstream Institute education (Might have done a
>>>    bit of a sales pitch for the next session here ;-))
>>>    - Expanded upon the Upstream Institute education to explain how what
>>>    was taught there specifically applied to Cinder
>>>    - Walked through the main Cinder code tree
>>>    - Described how to test changes to Cinder
>>>
>>> My presentation was designed to assume that attendees had been through
>>> Upstream Institute.  I had coverage in the slides in case they had not been
>>> through the education.  Unfortunately most of the class had not been
>>> through the education so I did spend a portion of time re-iterating those
>>> concepts and less time was able to be spent at the end going through real
>>> world examples of working with changes in Cinder.  I got feedback from a
>>> few people that having some real hands on coding examples would have been
>>> helpful.
>>>
>>> One way we could possible handle this is to split the on-boarding to a
>>> introduction section and then a more advanced second session.  The other
>>> option is that we require people who are attending the on-boarding to have
>>> been through Upstream Institute.  Something to think about.
>>>
>>> I think it was unfortunate that the session wasn't recorded.  We shared
>>> a lot of good information (between good questions and having a good
>>> representation of Cinder's Core team in the room) that it would have been
>>> nice to capture.  Given this I am planning at some point in the near future
>>> to work with Walt Boring to record a version of the presentation that can
>>> be uploaded to our Cinder YouTube channel and include some coding examples.
>>>
>>> In summary, I think the on-boarding rooms were a great addition and the
>>> Cinder team is pleased with how we used the time.  I think it is something
>>> we would like to continue to invest time into developing and improving.
>>>
>>> Jay
>>>
>>> [1] https://www.slideshare.net/JayBryant2/openstack-cinder-
>>> onboarding-education-boston-summit-2017
>>>
>>>
>>> On 5/19/2017 3:43 PM, Lance Bragstad wrote:
>>>
>>> Project: Keystone
>>> Attendees: 12 - 15
>>>
>>> We conflicted with one of the Baremetal/VM sessions
>>>
>>> I attempted to document most of the session in my recap [0].
>>>
>>> We started out by doing a round-the-room of introductions so that folks
>>> could put IRC nicks to faces (we also didn't have a packed room so this
>>> went pretty quick). After that we cruised through a summary of keystone,
>>> the format of the projects, and the various processes we use. All of this
>>> took *maybe* 30 minutes.
>>>
>>> From there we had an open discussion and things evolved organically. We
>>> ended up going through:
>>>
>>>    - the differences between the v2.0 and v3 APIs
>>>    - keystonemiddleware architecture, how it aids services, and how it
>>>    interacts with keystone
>>>       - we essentially followed an API call for creating a instance
>>>       from keystone -> nova -> glance
>>>    - how authentication scoping works and why it works that way
>>>    - how federation works and why it's setup the way it is
>>>    - how federated authentication works (https://goo.gl/NfY3mr)
>>>
>>> All of this was pretty well-received and generated a lot of productive
>>> discussion. We also had several seasoned keystone contributors in the room,
>>> which helped a lot. Most of the attendees were all curious about similar
>>> topics, which was great, but we totally could have split into separate
>>> groups given the experience we had in the room (we'll save that in our back
>>> pocket for next time).
>>>
>>> [0] https://www.lbragstad.com/blog/openstack-boston-summit-recap
>>> [1] https://www.slideshare.net/LanceBragstad/keystone-project-onboarding
>>>
>>> On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 10:37 AM, Michał Jastrzębski <inc007 at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Kolla:
>>>> Attendees - full room (20-30?)
>>>> Notes - Conflict with kolla-k8s demo probably didn't help
>>>>
>>>> While we didn't have etherpad, slides, recording (and video dongle
>>>> that could fit my laptop), we had great session with analog tools
>>>> (whiteboard and my voice chords). We walked through architecture of
>>>> each Kolla project, how they relate to each other and so on.
>>>>
>>>> Couple things to take out from our onboarding:
>>>> 1. Bring dongles
>>>> 2. We could've used bigger room - people were leaving because we had
>>>> no chairs left
>>>> 3. Recording would be awesome
>>>> 4. Low tech is not a bad tech
>>>>
>>>> All and all, when we started session I didn't know what to expect or
>>>> what people will expect so we just...rolled with it, and people seemed
>>>> to be happy with it:) I think onboarding rooms were great idea (kudos
>>>> to whoever came up with it)! I'll be happy to run it again in Sydney.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Michal
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 19 May 2017 at 08:12, Julien Danjou <julien at danjou.info> wrote:
>>>> > On Fri, May 19 2017, Sean Dague wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >> If you ran a room, please post the project, what you did in the room,
>>>> >> what you think worked, what you would have done differently. If you
>>>> >> attended a room you didn't run, please provide feedback about which
>>>> one
>>>> >> it was, and what you thought worked / didn't work from the other
>>>> side of
>>>> >> the table.
>>>> >
>>>> > We shared a room for Telemetry and CloudKitty for 90 minutes.
>>>> > I was there with Gordon Chung for Telemetry.
>>>> > Christophe Sauthier was there for CloudKitty.
>>>> >
>>>> > We only had 3 people showing up in the session. One wanted to read his
>>>> > emails in a quiet room, the two others had a couple of question on
>>>> > Telemetry – though it was not really related to contribution as far
>>>> as I
>>>> > can recall.
>>>> >
>>>> > I had to leave after 45 minutes because they was an overlap with a
>>>> talk
>>>> > I was doing and rescheduling did not seem possible. And everybody
>>>> left a
>>>> > few minutes after I left apparently.
>>>> >
>>>> > --
>>>> > Julien Danjou
>>>> > -- Free Software hacker
>>>> > -- https://julien.danjou.info
>>>> >
>>>> > ____________________________________________________________
>>>> ______________
>>>> > 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
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>>> ______________
>>>> 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
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> __________________________________________________________________________
>>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>>> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribehttp://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>> ______________
>>> 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
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> --
>> Thanks,
>> Nikhil
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> ______________
>> 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
>>
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20170525/79862304/attachment.html>