[Openstack] Bringing focus to the Operators and Users at the next summit
Tristan Goode
tristan at aptira.com
Tue Dec 17 09:24:40 UTC 2013
Perfect stated Tom. Thank you.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tom Fifield [mailto:tom at openstack.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, 17 December 2013 11:23 AM
> To: openstack at lists.openstack.org
> Subject: Re: [Openstack] Bringing focus to the Operators and Users at
the next
> summit
>
> On 17/12/13 02:55, Tim Bell wrote:
> >
> >
> > Specifying something as a bug needs to determine things like 'what
> > component should this be addressed in' and describing the desired
> > behaviour. Many of the comments from the survey describe the pain
> > points, rather than the solutions. Upgrading is difficult, no
> > mechanism to auto restart VMs on other hypervisors, monitoring
> > frameworks, inconsistent options in command line tools and APIs, .
> > equally, missing functional gaps do not fall well into the bug system.
> >
> >
> >
> > I have received the feedback from operators when raising issues that
> > they get the response 'contributions are welcome'. Running an
> > openstack cloud can be non-trivial, especially the big ones, and there
> > is a need to appreciate that this effort is a significant part of the
> > OpenStack community effort (along with the blogs, the documentation
> > updates, the summit presentations).
> >
> >
> >
> > I personally have a different proposal to Tristan (although I like
> > his). my proposal is that each program should have a session dedicated
> > to user/operator needs at the start. Between the UC, the volunteers
> > to look at the survey comments and the user group ambassadors, we
> > should be able to put together a set of pain points to be considered
> > for the next release. solutions are up to the design teams.
>
> While I think that having such a session in each program fits well with
"our" (being
> "the developers'") mentality and/or schedule, I feel that it does not
suit with that of
> operators.
>
> This is because, as an operator, you typically don't just have problems
or feedback
> with one project.
>
> Looking through the survey comments, it's likely that if those kind of
operators were
> attending summits, they'd have to attend a high fraction of every such
session.
>
> In addition, points of pain can often be about the integration between
services, the
> consistency between them, or whole-of-project issues. Like the fact our
python
> clients all have different import lines, or the way DNS works between
Nova and
> Neutron, and so on.
>
>
> The conversation of late has been leaning towards a happy scenario where
> "operators" and "developers" come together in a session and the former
presents
> their concerns to the latter, who promptly go away and Fix All The
Things.
>
> To be frank, having been on the "operator" side of the fence, and
participating in all
> of the frequent cursing, desk-slamming, whiteboard-workarounding,
nagios-alert-
> spam-receiving it takes to run an OpenStack cloud ... I'm not sure we
can let
> "operators" loose in such a session without some kind of filter - it
might put
> "developers" off helping if we descent into full sysadmin rant :) But we
do need to
> get that feedback through somehow.
>
> I have full appreciation for the session that the swift team ran with
the LINE guys at
> Hong Kong - that was seriously awesome to hear about and we should be
doing
> more of it. Though, I believe some of the value came from the fact that
it was an
> individual user stepping through their entire requirements. Challenging
the
> assumptions. Quite different from a torrent of people in a room :)
>
>
> The survey comments we've got are good, as is the plan Tim has put
together to
> wrangle them into a format where they perhaps can be taken to developers
as bugs,
> or blueprints - as Joe suggested. However, due to the nature of the
survey, they are
> most often brief, and surface-level.
>
> I believe what "getting Operators in a room" can achieve for us is
providing that
> same kind of feedback, but with far greater depth than can be achieved
by a 200
> pixel survey box.
>
> A scenario I'd propose is to arrange something where we:
> 1. allow the full-descent into sysadmin rant, where people feel
comfortable to air
> each and every grievance they've had with any part of OpenStack,
recording all of
> this (in a manipulable, written format minus
> cursing)
> 2. refuel our sysadmins with [beverage], while a small team attempts to
wrangle the
> mass of comment into something that can be discussed 3. bring back in
the fearless
> operators, then have a more structured discussion about which items are
really the
> big ones - and dive deeper into those so a full understanding is had of
use-
> cases/'whys'/'whats'
>
>
> at the conclusion of this session, we clean it up a bit and can pass it
on to our super-
> awesome "developers", who probably haven't had time to make it to this
multi-hour
> session, but will subsequently bow in awe of all of the awesome
suggestions and
> people who love their work :)
>
> For thoroughness, this passing-to could happen at session-per-program as
> suggested, or in some other asynchronous way.
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> Tom
>
>
> >
> >
> > Tim
> >
> >
> >
> > *From:*Joe Gordon [mailto:joe.gordon0 at gmail.com]
> > *Sent:* 16 December 2013 18:38
> > *To:* Tristan Goode
> > *Cc:* openstack at lists.openstack.org
> > *Subject:* Re: [Openstack] Bringing focus to the Operators and Users
> > at the next summit
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 10:36 PM, Tristan Goode <tristan at aptira.com
> > <mailto:tristan at aptira.com>> wrote:
> >
> > I'm trying to establish a feedback loop "because" we (Operators,
> > Users, etc)
> > need to better present our actual real world, evidence based
> > Operator, User,
> >
> > and even other input like Sales and Marketing experiences back
> > into the
> >
> > development teams. Much of this does and will come from the great
> > work of
> > the UC, the User surveys, and especially the folks that have
> > volunteered to
> > analyse the survey results. I'm hoping to build on the survey
> > analysis and
> > collaboratively and constructively focus that to present a
blueprint or
> > roadmap with a "whole of OpenStack" scope. We can dig deeper into
> > the user
> > survey feedback and break beyond the bounds of the limited format
of the
> > user survey to seed the discussion. For me, the most valuable
session in
> > Hong Kong was the discussion led by Tim of the user survey. It was
> > however,
> > all too short.
> >
> >
> >
> > Do you have any examples of what kind of feedback you would like to
> > pass on to developers (I was unable to attend Tim's discussion of the
> > user survey)? Also just playing devils advocate here, but why not use
> > our bug system to provide feedback?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Sean Dague [mailto:sean at dague.net <mailto:sean at dague.net>]
> > > Sent: Saturday, 14 December 2013 3:02 AM
> > > To: openstack at lists.openstack.org
> > <mailto:openstack at lists.openstack.org>
> > > Subject: Re: [Openstack] Bringing focus to the Operators and
Users
> > at the
> > > next
> > > summit
> > >
> > > So not that I don't think this is a worth while thing, because I
> > think it
> > > is. But instead
> > > of jumping to the solution of a User Day, it might be useful to
> > figure out
> > > what's
> > > attempting to be solved.
> > >
> > > Is it?
> > >
> > > 1) get Users together to share best practices among themselves?
> > Because
> > > lots of
> > > people have learned things, and want to bootstrap others.
> > >
> > > 2) get Users and Operators together to share best practices
among
> > > themselves?
> > > Because ...
> > >
> > > 3) get Vendors and Users and Operators together? Because ...
> > >
> > > 4) get Developers and Users and Operators together? Because ....
> > >
> > > I think if you start with defining the Because ... part, then
the
> > needed
> > > parties, then
> > > the odds of this being successful and useful to folks goes way
up.
> > It also
> > > would give
> > > people attending a reasonable expectation of what they are going
> > to get
> > > out of it.
> > >
> > > Because it would be a shame to set up #1, if most people thought
> > they were
> > > getting
> > > #4 (which is basically what Lorin was proposing with his adopt a
> > developer
> > > idea),
> > > then people being disappointed that they didn't get what they
> > thought they
> > > were
> > > getting.
> > >
> > > The design summit works pretty well for the development
community
> > because
> > > of
> > > how narrowly it is scoped. So a critical mass in each of those
> > rooms knows
> > > when it's
> > > getting off track and how to pull it back to something
actionable
> > at the
> > > end.
> > >
> > > -Sean
> > >
> > > On 12/13/2013 06:05 AM, Tristan Goode wrote:
> > > > I guess what I'm trying to say by "Users and Operators" covers
> > > > carriers and telcos. By User I mean folks that consume
OpenStack
> > > > resources and by Operator I mean folks that supply OpenStack
> > > > resources. Maybe all can be called Users but whatever one
calls it,
> > > > what I mean basically is Non-Developers actually working on
and with
> > > > OpenStack. :)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Cheers
> > > >
> > > > Tristan
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > *From:*Kyle MacDonald [mailto:kyle.macdonald at gmail.com
> > <mailto:kyle.macdonald at gmail.com>
> > > > <mailto:kyle.macdonald at gmail.com
> <mailto:kyle.macdonald at gmail.com>>]
> > > > *Sent:* Thursday, 12 December 2013 7:02 PM
> > > > *To:* Tristan Goode
> > > > *Cc:* openstack at lists.openstack.org
> > <mailto:openstack at lists.openstack.org>
> > > > <mailto:openstack at lists.openstack.org
> > <mailto:openstack at lists.openstack.org>>
> > > > *Subject:* Re: [Openstack] Bringing focus to the Operators and
Users
> > > > at the next summit
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Tristan
> > > >
> > > > I like this idea and agree it should be a priority. I do
suggest the
> > > > focus area be expanded (or a second focus day) to accommodate
> > carriers
> > > > and telcos and their operations needs (they are real
operators).
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > There is a ton of work being done by the leading telco's
around NFV
> > > > and SDN (many in emerging use cases) using OpenStack. I can
very
> > > > easily see "operations" being a killer issue and something
that
> > should
> > > > be more broadly addressed. Last summit the forum for that
track of
> > > > discussions was by a vendor - next summit this area should be
made
> > > > more neutral and inclusive.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Kyle
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Dec 11, 2013, at 10:55 PM, Tristan Goode
<tristan at aptira.com
> > <mailto:tristan at aptira.com>
> > > > <mailto:tristan at aptira.com <mailto:tristan at aptira.com>>>
wrote:
> > > >
> > > > G'day OpenStackLand,
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I have an idea for the next summit to put forward...
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Like we have the various project design summit session
days
> > at the
> > > > summits, I think it'd be really useful to have an
Operators and
> > > > Users day at the very start of the next summit (and
> > hopefully all of
> > > > them in future if it works out). So far at the last 4
> > summits I've
> > > > attended, from the users and operators point of view we've
> > had a rag
> > > > tag bunch of disconnected panels and 40 minute sessions
that
> > really
> > > > don't get anywhere much and don't make it to any sort of
plan or
> > > > worthwhile result. This proposed "Operators and Users" day
> > will be
> > > > run like the design summit session days where all of us
that
> > have to
> > > > deal with the consequences of the software development of
this
> > > > project sit in a room and work the issues. The goal is to
> > present
> > > > real world, evidence based Operator, User, and even other
> > input like
> > > > Sales and Marketing experiences back into the development
teams.
> > > > Maybe we might even have our own "Operators and Users"
> > lounge too.
> > > > :-P
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Cheers
> > > >
> > > > Tristan
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Mailing list:
> > > >
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
> > > > Post to : openstack at lists.openstack.org
> > <mailto:openstack at lists.openstack.org>
> > > > <mailto:openstack at lists.openstack.org
> > <mailto:openstack at lists.openstack.org>>
> > > > Unsubscribe :
> > > >
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Mailing list:
> > > > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
> > > > Post to : openstack at lists.openstack.org
> > <mailto:openstack at lists.openstack.org>
> > > > Unsubscribe :
> > > > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Sean Dague
> > > http://dague.net
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Mailing list:
> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
> > Post to : openstack at lists.openstack.org
> > <mailto:openstack at lists.openstack.org>
> > Unsubscribe :
> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Mailing list:
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
> > Post to : openstack at lists.openstack.org
> > Unsubscribe :
> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list:
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
> Post to : openstack at lists.openstack.org
> Unsubscribe :
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
More information about the Openstack
mailing list