[Openstack] Bringing focus to the Operators and Users at the next summit

Tristan Goode tristan at aptira.com
Fri Dec 20 06:55:28 UTC 2013 

I guess the simplest meaning is "all those that are not committing code to
the OpenStack code base"? :D


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Everett Toews [mailto:everett.toews at RACKSPACE.COM]
> Sent: Wednesday, 18 December 2013 1:54 AM
> To: Tristan Goode
> Cc: Tom Fifield; <openstack at lists.openstack.org>
> Subject: Re: [Openstack] Bringing focus to the Operators and Users at
the next
> summit
>
> Hi Tristan,
>
> Can you clarify what you meant by Users in your subject line?
>
> I took it to mean application developers (i.e. the developers writing
applications on
> top of OpenStack) and possibly application operators (i.e. the operators
deploying
> applications on top of OpenStack). They seem to have gotten lost in the
discussion
> here.
>
> Ultimately, OpenStack is being built for them. As I believe was your
original intent,
> they need a voice in such a forum too. I realize that even less
application developers
> are likely to attend the summit than operators.
>
> However we still need to encourage their involvement and make a place
for them.
> We also need to encourage operators to gather feedback from their
application
> developers about their experiences developer on top of OpenStack as I'm
sure the
> operations folk get an occasional ear full from them. ;)
>
> Thanks,
> Everett
>
> P.S. Just to be clear...because we have a lot of overlapping
terminology.
>
> application developers = the developers writing applications on top of
OpenStack
> application operators = the operators deploying applications on top of
OpenStack
> [OpenStack] developers = the developers writing OpenStack [OpenStack]
operators
> = the developers deploying OpenStack
>
>
> On Dec 17, 2013, at 3:24 AM, Tristan Goode wrote:
>
> > 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
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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