Open Stack

There are several needs as yet unmet in the openstack project family.

I know at my employer ( a large notable openstack cloud ), we have been
working internally on some cmdb style APIs that we may or may not target
for open source contribution.

I think there's also a need for operations to own parts of OOO, ceilometer,
and other projects.

So I don't know how to structurally target operations involvement other
than maybe the post of an embedded operations person in core of a project
that is relevant.  But they would have to be a heavy contributor.  That
seems outside scope of the openstack foundation.

That being said, maybe an OSSG style group of contributors who work to
target project development and documentation sprints for the community.

-Matt


On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 7:04 PM, Jonathan Proulx <jon at jonproulx.com> wrote:

> I agree that having some form of formal coordination would be useful,
> that the final Friday session in Atlanta is good time to discuss it.
> Whether we want (or need) a "PTL" as defined in OpenStack governance
> or something else like a program chair or committee with a more
> limited role of coordinating summit or other conference talks is at
> this point very open I think.
>
> I can certainly see an advantage to having a full operations program,
> but as Tim (I believe) pointed out finding a set of qualified people
> with enough time to do anything useful is particularly difficult (I
> say as I sit typing in my office at 19:05 local time Saturday having
> been here since noon)....
>
> On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 3:20 PM, Michael Still <mikal at stillhq.com> wrote:
> > I think an ops PTL would require a clear set of tasks that an ops
> > program was working on. We have examples of largely codeless programs
> > now (release management, security) but its still important that the
> > program have a set of shared goals.
> >
> > You can see the requirements for a new program here:
> >
> >
> http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/governance/tree/reference/new-programs-requirements
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Michael
> >
> > On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 5:44 AM, John Dewey <john at dewey.ws> wrote:
> >> As all the current projects are having PTL elections, I thought I would
> >> throw this out there.
> >> Would it make sense to have an ops PTL?  I could see this being useful
> in
> >> some ways,
> >> and not in others.  Maybe something to discuss at the un-conference.
> >>
> >> John
> >>
> >> On Friday, March 28, 2014 at 2:34 AM, Tom Fifield wrote:
> >>
> >> All,
> >>
> >> I had a bit of a play around, combining some similar things from the
> >> suggestions, and was able to come up with something that I think covers
> >> everything that was suggested. If it's way off - no problems, we can go
> >> to a vote or similar.
> >>
> >> Also had a go at selecting moderators for sessions based on our
> >> volunteers - feel free to strike yourself out or move around.
> >>
> >> All of this is up for discussion and change, so read below and head on
> >> over to the etherpad, or post a reply email :)
> >>
> >> https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/ATL-ops-unconference-RFC
> >>
> >>
> >> Monday
> >> 0700 - 1115 Registration, Keynotes, Break
> >> 1115 - 1155 Ask the devs: Meet the PTLs and TC, How to get the best
> >> out of the design summit
> >> 1205 - 1245 Reasonable Defaults
> >>
> >> 1400 - 1440 Upgrades and Deployment Approaches
> >> 1450 - 1530 Architecture Show and Tell, Tales and Fails
> >> 1540 - 1620 Architecture Show and Tell, Tales and Fails
> >>
> >> 1730 - 1810 Security (MODERATOR NEEDED)
> >>
> >> Schedule: Friday
> >> 9:00 - 9:40 Enterprise Gaps
> >> 9:50 - 10:30 Database
> >>
> >> 10:50 - 11:30 Issues at Scale
> >> 11:40 - 12:20 Monitoring and Logging
> >>
> >> 1:20 - 2:00 Ansible (MODERATOR NEEDED)
> >> 2:10 - 2:50 Chef
> >> 3:00 - 3:40 Puppet
> >>
> >> 4:00 - 4:40 Networking
> >> 4:50 - 5:30 Best discovery of the week, Meta Discussion - ops
> >> communication and governance
> >>
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >>
> >>
> >> Tom
> >>
> >> On 27/03/14 11:20, Tom Fifield wrote:
> >>
> >> All,
> >>
> >> The idea for this "Operators Summit" has received excellent support, and
> >> we have more than twenty session ideas proposed in the etherpad:
> >> https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/ATL-ops-unconference-RFC
> >>
> >> We've blocked out a room on Monday to host it.
> >>
> >> What we need now is:
> >> 1) Find moderators for the sessions
> >> 2) Select which sessions are going to happen
> >> 3) For the architecture show-and-tell, we probably need to select who
> >> will present in this.
> >>
> >> If you can help with any of this, please do get in touch, or get your
> >> name down on the etherpad. I'll be in contact soon.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >>
> >>
> >> Tom
> >>
> >> On 17/03/14 07:54, Tom Fifield wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> Would you like more time at the summit to talk OpenStack ops? Read on!
> >>
> >> Of course, we will have a dedicated Operations track in the conference -
> >> and it's going to be better than ever this year, with an all-new
> >> selection group ... all of whom actually run clouds.
> >>
> >>
> >> However, we've never really had many design-summit style
> >> feedback/sharing sessons for ops. Let's change that.
> >>
> >>
> >> Would you find it useful to have a space to share architectures, best
> >> practices, and give feedback on the bits of OpenStack that are giving
> >> you pain? Or perhaps find out how to get more involved in the Open
> >> Design process? Help us justify locking away a few rooms :)
> >>
> >>
> >> Just to start the discussion, I have written up a straw man proposal/RFC
> >> of one potential use of the time. It's specifically designed to be
> >> ripped to shreds - so please do!
> >>
> >> The idea is to have something that's more like a design summit feel -
> >> people sitting in a room discussing things, as opposed to more
> >> presentations.
> >>
> >> https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/ATL-ops-unconference-RFC
> >>
> >>
> >> So, what would you like to see?
> >>
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >>
> >>
> >> Tom
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> OpenStack-operators mailing list
> >> OpenStack-operators at lists.openstack.org
> >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> OpenStack-operators mailing list
> >> OpenStack-operators at lists.openstack.org
> >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> OpenStack-operators mailing list
> >> OpenStack-operators at lists.openstack.org
> >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> OpenStack-operators mailing list
> >> OpenStack-operators at lists.openstack.org
> >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Rackspace Australia
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > OpenStack-operators mailing list
> > OpenStack-operators at lists.openstack.org
> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-operators mailing list
> OpenStack-operators at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-operators/attachments/20140329/6608c6fd/attachment.html>