Open Stack

How about we do a mid-summit user/operator boot camp (like the programs do, i.e. February or so) where:

- we get some operators and users (i.e. those that run and those that consume) OpenStack together
- we describe our pain points (as Tom would say curse/desk-slam/white-board) 
- we prepare a set of blueprints and corresponding representatives to explain them to the development community
- we identify cross-project issues and take them to the TC 

My experience is that there is significant overlap between us all so it is not necessary to have everyone there, especially if we solicit input before through the ambassadors etc.

Tim

On 20 Dec 2013, at 07:55, Tristan Goode <tristan at aptira.com> wrote:

> 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
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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