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

Matthew Ray matthewhray at gmail.com
Sat Dec 21 04:22:20 UTC 2013 

Perhaps we could try to co-locate a future Operators mini-summit with
FOSDEM or SCALE (February) and/or OSCON (July)? Events like those are
conveniently scheduled between November and April and likely to already
have OpenStack-related developers/deployers planning on attending. The
logistics might not work for February, but we should start planning for the
future.

Thanks,
Matt Ray


On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 9:57 PM, Matthew Ray <matthewhray at gmail.com> wrote:

> Yes please, the sooner something can be planned the better. The gap
> between development and operations is growing bigger every release.
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 1:46 PM, Tim Bell <Tim.Bell at cern.ch> wrote:
>
>>
>> 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
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack/attachments/20131220/2aa9bd2d/attachment.html>

More information about the Openstack mailing list