Open Stack

+1 (we had 2 people at the mid-cycle last time, so we would not have been impacted by this)

When there are multiple 4+ breakout sessions going on at the same time and they are all (hopefully) relevant to you/your company?  I would agree that if someone had 20+ people from a single company going, that the return on investment would be diminished, but I am not sure that should be something that should enforced by the foundation.
____________________________________________

Kris Lindgren
Senior Linux Systems Engineer
GoDaddy, LLC.


From: Matt Fischer <matt at mattfischer.com<mailto:matt at mattfischer.com>>
Date: Tuesday, June 30, 2015 at 6:22 PM
To: Edgar Magana <edgar.magana at workday.com<mailto:edgar.magana at workday.com>>
Cc: OpenStack Operators <openstack-operators at lists.openstack.org<mailto:openstack-operators at lists.openstack.org>>
Subject: Re: [Openstack-operators] Scaling the Ops Meetup


I strongly disagree with a quota system. If for nothing else then that there's no fair way to do it. But more importantly this is a community, not a Senate meeting and all contributors should be welcome. How would you explain to someone who regularly contributes that they cannot attend due to a quota?

On Jun 30, 2015 5:48 PM, "Edgar Magana" <edgar.magana at workday.com<mailto:edgar.magana at workday.com>> wrote:
Tom,

In my opinion, we should not have booths at all. Actually, we should just only have Operators attending this meetup with a limit of three attendees by company. During the Philadelphia one I noticed that many of the attendees where from the same company and I do not believe those companies need to send so many people.

About the vendors, they have their opportunity during the OpenStack Summit, let's just keep it that way.

Operators meetup should be a space were we can share best practices, issues, concerns and anything that we consider sharable with the rest of the community. It should not be a space for vendors to collect information about details of what we are deploying and how we are doing it. Let's try to build a safe space to share all this important knowledge.

I also wanted to bring to your attention that during the summit the attendance was lower that in the mid-cycle one (Philadelphia). Probably because there are so many things running in parallel that people just need to decide between very important sessions. So, does it make sense to have four Operators meetups along the year?  Maybe not!
What about just having the mid-cycle ones?

Thanks,

Edgar




On 6/29/15, 9:33 PM, "Tom Fifield" <tom at openstack.org<mailto:tom at openstack.org>> wrote:

>Hi all,
>
>Right now, behind-the-scenes, we're working on getting a venue for next
>ops mid-cycle. It's taking a little longer than normal, but rest assured
>it is happening.
>
>Why is it so difficult? As you may have noticed, we're reaching the size
>of event where both physically and financially, only the largest
>organisations can host us.
>
>We thought we might get away with organising this one old-school with a
>single host and sponsor. Then, for the next, start a brainstorming
>discussion with you about how we scale these events into the future -
>since once we get up and beyond a few hundred people, we're looking at
>having to hire a venue as well as make some changes to the format of the
>event.
>
>However, it seems that even this might be too late. We already had a
>company that proposed to host the meetup at a west coast US hotel
>instead of their place, and wanted to scope out other companies to
>sponsor food.
>
>This would be a change in the model, so let's commence the discussion of
>how we want to scale this event :)
>
>So far I've heard things like:
>* "my $CORPORATE_BENEFACTOR would be fine to share sponsorship with others"
>* "I really don't want to get to the point where we want booths at the
>ops meetup"
>
>Which are promising! It seems like we have a shared understanding of
>what to take this forward with.
>
>So, as the ops meetup grows - what would it look like for you?
>
>How do you think we can manage the venue selection and financial side of
>things? What about the session layout and the scheduling with the
>growing numbers of attendees?
>
>Current data can be found at
>https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Operations/Meetups#Venue_Selection .
>
>I would also be interested in your thoughts about how these events have
>only been in a limited geographical area so far, and how we can address
>that issue.
>
>
>Regards,
>
>
>Tom
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>OpenStack-operators mailing list
>OpenStack-operators at lists.openstack.org<mailto: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<mailto: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/20150701/6c190ae6/attachment.html>