Open Stack

On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 5:38 PM, John Garbutt <john at johngarbutt.com> wrote:

>
> I was thinking of trying for the next PWG meeting that I am able to
> attend, and discuss things together in that? Where is the wiki page
> for all those meetings, I couldn't find it, for some reason?
>
[ST] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/product-team: we meet every
Monday @ 1900 UTC but we will be skipping next Monday due to travel for
ops-summit.

Thanks,
Shamail


> Thanks,
> John
>
> > Thanks
> > Carol
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: johngarbutt at gmail.com [mailto:johngarbutt at gmail.com] On Behalf Of
> John Garbutt
> > Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2015 2:25 AM
> > To: Shamail
> > Cc: Barrett, Carol L; product-wg at lists.openstack.org
> > Subject: Re: [Product] Nova and the Product Working Group
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > So I am a bit worried this proposed approach will alienate a lot of the
> Nova developers. Let me explain...
> >
> > This is the exact point in the development cycle where we are focusing
> on almost everything except reviewing new use cases and features, so I
> think looking to review those user stores in a developer meeting will not
> go down well:
> > https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Nova/Liberty_Release_Schedule
> >
> > My aim is really to raise awareness of our current priorities and
> project scope (and discuss those, so we all understand them), while you are
> working on the use cases and working out priorities.
> >
> > On reflection, I think its better to get Nova folks into your
> discussions, rather than the other way around.
> >
> > Let me respond to a few specific questions...
> >
> > On 11 August 2015 at 03:37, Shamail <itzshamail at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Hi John,
> >>
> >> To follow up... We discussed the interlock opportunity today at our
> meeting.  Geoff Arnold and I will join the upcoming Nova meeting this
> Thursday at 21:00 UTC.  The offer for us to attend another meeting, after
> the cross project meeting, the week of 8/24 still stands too.
> >
> > I am very unlikely to be at that meeting (as I am in a field, at a music
> festival at that time.)
> >
> > (For context, I don't usually chair that meeting, as I just can't do a
> good job of that at 10pm).
> >
> >> I wanted to make introductions and start the communication as soon as
> possible per your suggestion.  We can discuss what your expectations are
> from the Product WG, we can give an update on our activities, and find out
> how we can best help before (and during) the Nova design summit for Mitaka.
> >
> > My expectations are for the Product WG to engage with the existing
> development processes. I want to help guide you all through that.
> >
> > Once we try that out, I am sure there will be changes that make sense,
> but this is about you all gaining influence with the developer community.
> >
> > If you want a use case to get traction, I think you need to help recruit
> developers to work on that along side the rest of the upstream community.
> >
> >>> On Aug 10, 2015, at 6:27 PM, Barrett, Carol L <
> carol.l.barrett at intel.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> John - I want to echo Shamail's Thank you. Your partnership is
> appreciated.
> >>>
> >>> I think that we are, roughly, on track to intercept Liberty 3/Start of
> Mikata Design Summit planning. We are working to complete the list of user
> stories for our pilot, with input from Operators by the end of next week.
> Our plan is to review that in the cross-project team meeting the week of
> 8/24 (haven't asked for agenda time yet). Do you think it will make sense
> to review the Nova related user stories in a Nova team meeting that week
> too? I'm sure it would be very helpful for the gaps analysis around each
> user story.
> >
> > Basically, no, I don't think thats a good idea. See above.
> >
> >>> I agree with Shamail about adding the product manager collaboration
> topic to our Mid-Cycle meeting.
> >
> > I think this is the most important thing for the group to do, by far.
> >
> > From where I am stood its 100 times (yes, thats a random number) more
> important than the list of user stories.
> >
> > Now if the list of user stories is a good way to start the conversation,
> and I think it probably is, then thats cool. Its just if the list ends up
> getting ignored by the developer community, the process is still a good
> stepping stone to where there is more cross company collaboration at the
> product level.
> >
> >>> On your Mission, it's a great starting place and with my Enterprise
> hat on, I am quite heartened to see upgrades included. I think there may
> also be something around robustness/reliability that would be important to
> Operators to include.
> >
> > I guess we consider robustness/reliability implicitly part of a good API.
> >
> > If the API doesn't work reliably, its pointless. If people keep having
> to retry deletes, well thats a bad API (slightly depending on who you ask).
> >
> >>> On priorities, Scheduler and Upgrades are v important.
> >
> > We have spend the last few years doing the ground work here. Its been a
> long process, but we are getting results now:
> >
> http://www.danplanet.com/blog/2015/06/26/upgrading-nova-to-kilo-with-minimal-downtime
> >
> > The upgrade obligations are really slowing down development, but its
> important.
> >
> >>> I would propose adding something explicit about reducing outstanding
> bug count (Live migration being an important area) to help direct reviewers
> to those patches.
> >
> > As no one stepped up to help, it is on this list for liberty:
> >
> http://specs.openstack.org/openstack/nova-specs/priorities/liberty-priorities.html#priorities-without-a-clear-plan
> >
> > We are trying out a few things to fix that (see subgroups recommending
> the most important patches, and my effort to bring back bug triage and bug
> review days).
> >
> > For those wanting to help live migrate, they should put effort behind
> making this test work:
> > gate-tempest-dsvm-multinode-full
> > Until that is properly working (i am told its getting close), there is
> little we can do.
> >
> > If there are bugs that need more attention (certainly review wise), get
> in touch, and I can help with that, using our existing processes.
> > Do get in touch with me for some specific help, but there are some
> general tips here:
> >
> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Nova/Liberty_Release_Schedule#How_can_I_get_my_code_merged_faster.3F
> >
> >>> I believe that the Neutron/Nova-network migration path needs a good
> definition, esp in light of the DefCore direction.
> >
> > In general, a fully automated migration for all cases is just not
> feasible.
> >
> > We are looking for folks to help setup up an identify the specific
> scenarios that need a migration path.
> >
> > There are still worries about Neutron not supporting the same features
> as nova-network, and folks are working on the gaps there (better support
> from the linux bridge was one of the items).
> >
> > We missed that off from this list, mostly as we were more worried about
> the other items in this list (I really should describe those better, they
> are mostly about stability):
> >
> http://specs.openstack.org/openstack/nova-specs/priorities/liberty-priorities.html#priorities-without-a-clear-plan
> >
> >>> As we put in placed CPL (Cross Project Liasons) between the Product
> Working group and the other Project teams, I'm hopeful that we will better
> both align and integrate with the community processes and methods.
> >
> > We have had variable success with CPLs, but I think its a good starting
> point. I don't see any listed on the wiki yet:
> > https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/CrossProjectLiaisons
> >
> > Thanks,
> > John
> >
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: Shamail Tahir [mailto:itzshamail at gmail.com]
> >>> Sent: Friday, August 07, 2015 8:33 AM
> >>> To: John Garbutt
> >>> Cc: product-wg at lists.openstack.org
> >>> Subject: Re: [Product] Nova and the Product Working Group
> >>>
> >>> Hi John,
> >>>
> >>> Thank you for reaching out!  Please see my comments in-line.  We look
> forward to speaking with you soon.
> >>>
> >>>> On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 7:59 AM, John Garbutt <john at johngarbutt.com>
> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi,
> >>>>
> >>>> I would love to start a conversation with you all about Nova and
> Mitaka.
> >>>>
> >>>> Probably makes sense to arrange a meeting to discuss these points,
> >>>> or I could join one of your meetings. I can invite other developers
> >>>> along that might be interested.
> >>> [ST] We would love for yourself and the team do stop by for one of our
> meetings.  We should target either this coming Monday (8/17) or the Monday
> after the ops summit/product midcycle (8/24).  We can join one of your
> meetings as well but it would be great to have you join our meeting so that
> we can maximize the number of product WG members that can participate.
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> It would be great to get this done before liberty-3, so can get to
> >>>> something that can inform the chosen Design Summit sessions.
> >>> [ST] +1.  The product WG is planning to pilot a "workflow" that spans
> the sequence of events leading from documenting user stories from various
> sources all the way through engagement/collaboration with the developer
> community.  We plan to discuss the available user stories next week and,
> hopefully, determine which ones we can use to "pilot" the process.
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Starting the Conversation
> >>>> -------------------------
> >>>>
> >>>> If I was asked to pick on key deliverable for the Product Working
> >>>> Group, I think it would be to create a forum for Product Managers to
> >>>> collaborate, and discuss each others mission, goals and priorities.
> >>>> Making it easier to understand where organisations can work together
> >>>> and avoid duplicate efforts. It would be great if this includes you
> >>>> all discussing the feedback from all the different user and operator
> >>>> groups.
> >>> [ST] This is good feedback and aligns well with portions of why there
> was an interest to create this group to begin with.  This discussion would
> probably make a great agenda item for our mid-cycle (8/20-8/21 in Santa
> Clara, CA).
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I am much less interested in any documents or deliverables, its that
> >>>> cross company alignment and agreement, that will be extremely
> >>>> valuable to the developer community.
> >>> [ST] The user story deliverable is the medium through which we will be
> expressing our interests and documenting them so that they can be shared.
> >>> The value is definitely in alignment, cross project
> collaboration/tracking, and being an aggregation point for feedback,
> however I do believe the user story (and the associated discussions) are
> vital for this alignment/agreement to be realized.
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> That will naturally trickle back into the developer community
> >>>> through the guidance you give to all the people you have working on
> OpenStack.
> >>>>
> >>>> There is one big concern that has been raised around how the product
> >>>> working group and the developer community interacts. If done
> >>>> incorrectly, it can look like the developer community is ignoring
> >>>> the user requests presented to it. I want to make sure we start
> >>>> things off in a way that will not alienate either of the groups.
> >>> [ST] +1
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I guess I am asking that we try and find a way for you all to engage
> >>>> in the current developer community processes. I know we have had
> >>>> great input from product managers during design summit sessions in
> >>>> the past, it would be great to see more of that input again. Many
> >>>> discussions (and nova-specs) start with a definition of the user
> >>>> problem that needs addressing. I am sure good input into those
> >>>> discussion would be welcomed.
> >>> [ST] We might have limited bandwidth to really dig in at the moment
> since we are "piloting" the process through the Mitaka design summit, but
> we would be glad to help where we can!  The current plan is to review a set
> of initial user story submissions next week, identify team members to help
> coordinate them, share our list with the community for feedback (the
> prioritization process will change in the future but we opted for a
> lightweight weighing exercise for the pilot), perform a gap analysis to
> determine which areas/projects map to the user story (this is another
> potential area for collaboration with the development community), join
> developer team meetings to share user stories/context to get feedback and
> forge partnerships, and be available at the design summit to participate in
> discussions for those user stories that require further discussion.
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Mission and Scope
> >>>> -----------------
> >>>>
> >>>> Secondly, I just wanted to share this document we have on Nova's
> scope:
> >>>> http://docs.openstack.org/developer/nova/project_scope.html
> >>>>
> >>>> As a developer community, we do have quite a strong shared mission
> >>>> for Nova. We are working to make sure that is articulated well, and
> >>>> shared more widely. The key parts of that are something like this:
> >>>> * Build a strong ecosystem by having a great API to access on demand
> >>>> compute resources, that works in the same way across all deployments
> >>>> * Help keep operators current by providing a good upgrade experience
> >>>> * Flexibility to grow because we work well for all sizes of cloud
> >>>> deployment
> >>>>
> >>>> We are reviewing all feature proposals through the lens of this
> >>>> mission. We don't claim to have succeeded in this mission, we aim to
> >>>> work towards that mission. I do feel there are key elements of the
> >>>> API users experience that are missing from that above description,
> >>>> but we have to start somewhere.
> >>> [ST] This is amazing John!  I like the fact that a document like this
> helps identify the focus areas that the team will be pursuing in the
> future.  I am certain there will be more feedback once the team can review
> the document.
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I am really interested in the product working group's feedback on
> >>>> our direction.
> >>> [ST] Likewise!  Thanks again for sending this message, we look forward
> to the partnership between the teams.
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Release Goals
> >>>> -------------
> >>>>
> >>>> Lastly, I would love feedback on the current set of Nova priorities:
> >>>>
> >>>> http://specs.openstack.org/openstack/nova-specs/priorities/liberty-p
> >>>> ri
> >>>> orities.html
> >>>>
> >>>> It is likely for Mitaka that we keep a similar set of priorities,
> >>>> but ideally adding at least one of these efforts:
> >>>>
> >>>> http://specs.openstack.org/openstack/nova-specs/priorities/liberty-p
> >>>> ri orities.html#priorities-without-a-clear-plan
> >>>>
> >>>> My ask is, does this list surprise you at all?
> >>>> Out of all these suggested items, which group would you choose?
> >>> [ST] Will review and get back to you.
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> This feedback will help with the picking of Nova Design Summit
> >>>> Sessions. The outcomes of those sessions help decide what can
> >>>> actually become a priority (a combination of reaching a certain
> >>>> level of consensus and having people free and willing to work on
> those things).
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Anyways, I hope that sparks some good discussions. Let me know what
> >>>> you all think.
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks,
> >>>> John
> >>>>
> >>>> Twitter/IRC: johnthetubaguy
> >>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> Product-wg mailing list
> >>>> Product-wg at lists.openstack.org
> >>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/product-wg
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Shamail Tahir
> >>> t: @ShamailXD
> >>> tz: Eastern Time
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Product-wg mailing list
> >>> Product-wg at lists.openstack.org
> >>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/product-wg
>



-- 
Thanks,
Shamail Tahir
t: @ShamailXD
tz: Eastern Time