Open Stack

Two things:
*  I think Randy frames up VERY well in his OpenStackSV talk the situation
we¹re dealing with and how this group could add value.
*  I participated in some of the Persona working group meetings this past
Summer.  At the time they seemed to be much more (exclusively?) focused on
Horizon - whereas I think we need to think about use cases in a broader
and more all-encompasing sense.  (I.e. How does a developer really and
practically need to use the various projects to accomplish their job).  I
think it makes sense for this team (when it comes to personas per se) to
have a strong connection with the Persona working group and asses whether
they¹re addressing the scope that Randy lays out in his talk.  If not -
then we may need to establish plans to augment.

Jim

On 12/23/14, 4:15 PM, "Jesse Proudman" <jproudman at bluebox.net> wrote:

>Agree w/ this 100%.
>
>
>Jesse Proudman
>Founder and CTO
>Blue Box Group, Inc.
>w. www.bluebox.net
>c. 206-778-8777
>
>On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 3:05 PM, Randy Bias <randyb at cloudscaling.com>
>wrote:
>
>> Actually, Stefano, you didn¹t even touch on the key motivation, from my
>> perspective, that sparked a lot of this.
>>
>> Here is the keynote I gave from September for those who haven¹t watched
>>it
>> yet:
>>
>>         https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zOAb6wfBYxU <
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zOAb6wfBYxU>
>>
>> The point of the entire presentation is to highlight that for 4 years
>>now
>> the PTLs and TC have believed that they own ³tactical² matters.  In
>>other
>> words, reviewing code, managing the integrated release cycle, and so on.
>> The entire PTL team in spring of 2014 at the first joint TC/Board
>>meeting,
>> unanimously agreed that they have NO oversight of strategic product
>> direction.  Neither does the board.
>>
>> This leaves a gigantic gap since you can¹t have ³strategy² coming as the
>> effect of grass-roots developers committing whatever code they want
>> willy-nilly.
>>
>> IMHO, the remit of this group is to establish a process by which longer
>> term vision and product direction can emerge from within the community.
>> Product managers at the various constituencies of OpenStack are
>>typically
>> on the hook for this within their businesses and I am hopeful that this
>> group can figure out a way (hopefully starting with my recommendations
>>in
>> the presentation above) to work with the TC, Board, and the greater
>> community to come up with a process by which we are thinking about
>> OpenStack over greater than a 6 month time horizon.
>>
>>
>> Best,
>>
>>
>> --Randy
>>
>> VP, Technology, EMC Corporation
>> Formerly Founder & CEO, Cloudscaling (now a part of EMC)
>> +1 (415) 787-2253 [google]
>> TWITTER: twitter.com/randybias
>> LINKEDIN: linkedin.com/in/randybias
>> ASSISTANT: ren.ly at emc.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Dec 23, 2014, at 2:52 PM, Stefano Maffulli <stefano at openstack.org>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > On Tue, 2014-12-23 at 12:06 -0600, Kyle Mestery wrote:
>> >> My concern is I don't understand why this discussion would not happen
>> >> with the broader project, which is on the openstack-dev list, IRC
>> >> meetings, and in gerrit. Is there a reason any of those three things
>> >> won't work?
>> >
>> > Important question, worth a separate subject.
>> >
>> > The Development mailing list averages over 600 messages per week [1],
>> > from over 200 different people: managing that traffic is very hard,
>> > requires dedication and attention. I have identified three major sets
>>of
>> > ATCs: core, regular and casual
>> > http://activity.openstack.org/dash/browser/
>> >
>> > Today we have:
>> >
>> > - Core (contribute up to 80% of integrated+incubated code): 254
>> > - Regular (contribute up to 90% of integrated+incubated code): 589
>> > - Casual (contribute the remaining 10%): 1,956
>> >
>> > I expect that core ATCs read and participate in openstack-dev, a part
>>of
>> > regulars do too but the Casual contributors IMO are not
>> > reading/participating much. In my experience very few contributors
>>have
>> > the skills *and* motivation to process such traffic effectively. Most
>> > contributors simply miss *a lot* of messages on the list because they
>> > can't (or don't know how to) manage high traffic email lists. The vast
>> > majority of Active Technical Contributors have no time/resources to
>> > process traffic on -dev.
>> >
>> > This means that managers of casual ATCs, which I expect this group is
>> > largely made of, have even less time/capabilities to follow -dev.
>> >
>> > A new group cannot really emerge and identify itself as a group inside
>> > another huge, trafficked channel. One reason for this mailing list is
>> > for this working group to establish itself.
>> >
>> > Besides the size of the -dev list, the topics discussed among devs are
>> > different than those discussed by the product/project managers in this
>> > WG: devs discuss engineering issues, like API stabilizations,
>> > versioning, interfaces etc. For this group the main topics are future
>> > roadmap, customer's impact and requests ...
>> >
>> > Operators have had a separate channel for a long time and have
>> > established themselves as a distinct group and learned how to engage
>> > with developers. The hope is that this group learns that too soon.
>> >
>> >> And if so, what is the purpose of the discussions here? Is it more of
>> >> just communicating changes? Call me honestly confused.
>> >
>> > Neutron's splitting of services and plugins is the sort of change that
>> > will affect equally core, regular and occasional contributors: core
>>ATCs
>> > probably know all about it, a part of regulars also know enough but
>> > occasional and a part of regular don't know what that means for their
>> > bottom line.
>> >
>> > What will happen to products based on Neutron? How will that affect
>> > their sales/marketing? What are the governance/legal implications for
>> > the new repositories? What does that mean for defcore and openstack
>> > trademarks? I don't think that these questions can be raised and
>>debated
>> > successfully anywhere else.
>> >
>> > /stef
>> >
>> >
>> > [1]
>> >
>> 
>>http://activity.openstack.org/dash/browser/repository.html?repository=htt
>>p%3A__lists.openstack.org_pipermail_openstack-dev&ds=mls
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Product-wg mailing list
>> > Product-wg at lists.openstack.org
>> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/product-wg
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Product-wg mailing list
>> Product-wg at lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/product-wg
>>
>_______________________________________________
>Product-wg mailing list
>Product-wg at lists.openstack.org
>http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/product-wg