Open Stack

Thanks Edgar.  I look forward to the draft document!

> On May 20, 2016, at 11:27 AM, Edgar Magana <edgar.magana at workday.com> wrote:
> 
> Hello Shamail and Team,
>  
> Thank you so much to clarify the current progress and the work in progress. Please, keep the hard work. Next week the UC will share with you and the rest of the WGs and Teams a document where we want to share with the board of directors to have a better alignment as User Committee with the rest of the OpenStack Governance. This is why I wanted to be sure we have a good set of milestones to be completed for this team.
>  
> Thanks,
>  
> Edgar
>  
> From: Shamail <itzshamail at gmail.com>
> Date: Thursday, May 19, 2016 at 4:19 PM
> To: Edgar Magana <edgar.magana at workday.com>
> Cc: "user-committee at lists.openstack.org" <user-committee at lists.openstack.org>, "openstack-operators at lists.openstack.org" <openstack-operators at lists.openstack.org>
> Subject: Re: [Openstack-operators] [recognition] Non-ATC Recognition WG Meeting Today (5/12/2016)
>  
> Hi Edgar,
> 
> On May 19, 2016, at 7:00 PM, Edgar Magana <edgar.magana at workday.com> wrote:
> 
> Shamail and Team,
>  
> Where are we I defining the activities for recognizing OpenStack Users? In my mind we have completed the definition and we agreed on:
> AUC – Active User Contributor
> We encourage the following activities:
> Organizers of any of the groups.openstack.org
> Active members and contributors to Functional Teams and/or Working Groups.
> Operators meet-up moderator
> Contributing to any repository under the UC governance (i.e. os-ops and user stories)
> Track chairs for OpenStack Summits
> Contributors to superuser (articles, interviews, user stories, etc.)
> Active moderators on ask.openstack
> If all this make sense, Do we still need to have this WG?
>  
> We have agreed on the contributors for phase 1 of the user-committee constituency and we are currently working on milestone-3 which is to define the metrics (and methods used to collect metrics) associated with the given activities.  
>  
> We have a few more milestones remaining[1] which concludes with us wrapping up the findings and sharing them with the user committee.  
>  
> I think it still makes sense for the working group to exist (for now) since we still need to formulate how we will capture the necessary metrics to validate that an individual meets the requirements for one of the roles mentioned by you.  We are also thinking about how to automate data collection and possibly integrate these metrics with Stackalytics (longer term) to give credit via that tool.
>  
> Please let me know if pursuing the remaining milestones make sense since we started the WG to help meet objectives given to us by the user committee.
>  
> [1] https://wiki.openstack.org/w/index.php?title=NonATCRecognition&mobileaction=toggle_view_desktop#Milestones
>  
> Thanks,
> Shamail 
> 
>  
> Thanks,
>  
> Edgar
>  
> From: Shamail <itzshamail at gmail.com>
> Date: Thursday, May 12, 2016 at 9:04 AM
> To: "user-committee at lists.openstack.org" <user-committee at lists.openstack.org>, "openstack-operators at lists.openstack.org"  <openstack-operators at lists.openstack.org>
> Subject: [Openstack-operators] [recognition] Non-ATC Recognition WG Meeting Today (5/12/2016)
>  
> Hi everyone,
> 
> 
> 
> The Non-ATC Recognition WG will be meeting today and the agenda has been posted on our wiki[1].  The team will be reviewing the results from working session in Austin in today's meeting. 
> 
> 
> 
> Meeting information:
> Date: 5/12
> Time: 1900 UTC
> IRC Channel: #openstack-meeting-3
> 
> 
> 
> [1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/NonATCRecognition
>  
> Thank you,
> Shamail 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-operators/attachments/20160520/fcf2232d/attachment.html>