Open Stack

Thanks, Carol: that’s captures it pretty well. Thierry was also in the breakout session in which I participated - see https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/PHL-ops-burning-issues <https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/PHL-ops-burning-issues> - during which we discussed the top 10 operators’ issues and what needed to be done to move them forward to actionable blueprint/deliverables/use cases. One of the issues - Keystone federation - is a natural topic for operations-based use cases and blueprints, and we set up a small WG to try to gather requirements between now and Vancouver.

Geoff

> On Mar 10, 2015, at 4:37 PM, Barrett, Carol L <carol.l.barrett at intel.com> wrote:
> 
> Geoff and I caught up with Thierry this afternoon, here's what I captured:
> * He thinks there's an opportunity for the Product WG to be the integration & consolidation of Operators feedback on product needs, providing 1 set of concise info to the PTLs/community
> * Providing the top 5-10 prioritized Use Cases/Themes, each including a matrix that lists gaps by projects, to the PTLs would be valuable
> * We need to workout timing for this, as it needs to happen ahead of the Design Summit. Probably include a session at the beginning of the Design Summit to review/discuss each Use Case and establish a cross-project plan for the release. 
> * He doesn't think we need to meet with the TC, it's the PTLs who are important for the discussion. The cross-project meeting is a good forum for us to use and we can either contact Theirry to get added to the agenda or pencil ourselves in on the wiki.
> * For the discussion we should bring our charter, a sample of our deliverable and a draft of the timeline/process.
> * If we are unable to gain support/alignment with the PTLs for some of the prioritized Use Cases/Themes, that's when we should approach the TC for their help and support.
> 
> Geoff - Anything to add?
> 
> Thanks
> Carol
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Barrett, Carol L 
> Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2015 11:04 AM
> To: Barrett, Carol L; Shamail
> Cc: product-wg at lists.openstack.org
> Subject: RE: [Product] Product team at the operator midcycle
> 
> At the Ops Meetup, I'm sitting in the Telco breakout session where we are reviewing Use Cases. Here's a link to their template, could be a good starting point for us to use: http://git.openstack.org/cgit/stackforge/telcowg-usecases/tree/template.rst
> 
> Some additions to consider:
> 1) Include Persona (who is trying to perform the activity)
> 2) Would this be performed by a person or sw/hw
> 3) What market segments could utilize this use case (enterprise, telco, etc)
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Barrett, Carol L [mailto:carol.l.barrett at intel.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2015 10:27 AM
> To: Shamail
> Cc: product-wg at lists.openstack.org
> Subject: Re: [Product] Product team at the operator midcycle
> 
> All - We haven't connected with Thierry yet, but have talked with a couple of PTLs/Foundation folks and wanted to pass along their feedback:
> 1) There is a need for someone(s) to take the discussions and feedback collected at Operators Meetups/Summits (and corresponding Etherpads) and translate it into actionable input for the PTLs and Project teams and follow-up.
> 2) PTLs need help and support in dedicating resources to bug fixes in addition to developing new features - to guide developer time and reviewer time.
> 3) PTLs want to see feedback as a Top 10 list for each project - not a laundry list, and not random
> 4) The type of feedback that would be most useful is Use Cases, that have enough description in them to enable developers to take action, and to understand why an existing feature isn't meeting the need.
> 5) We have talked about creating a roadmap of themes, but from the discussions here, it seems like a roadmap of use cases, with a table that indicates which projects are required to implement the Use Case could be an effective way.
> 6) In a discussion last week, someone floated the idea to me of having a Program Manager for each core project to work with and support the PTL in managing projects towards their goals. The PTLs have a lot on their plate and having a resource to monitor the work in the project, detect when it's not aligned with the goals and bring that discussion to the PTL and project team would be valuable. I think that this is an integration point for the Product WG and PTLs. Mechanics on how these people get assigned, needs to get worked. Thoughts?
> 
> That's all for now. Will try to catch Thierry after the afternoon breakout sessions.
> 
> Rocky/Geoff - Anything to add?
> 
> Thanks
> Carol
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Shamail [mailto:itzshamail at gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2015 3:35 AM
> To: Barrett, Carol L
> Cc: sean roberts; product-wg at lists.openstack.org
> Subject: Re: [Product] Product team at the operator midcycle
> 
> Hi Carol,
> 
> I think it might be a good idea to share our charter and progress with him.  I would defer to his recommendation on whether we should talk to the TC now or a bit later.  
> 
> My personal opinion is that we should target sooner (rather than later) since we want to ensure TC/PTL community is on-board, and able to help us, between now and Fall 2015.
> 
> Thanks,
> Shamail 
> 
> 
> 
>> On Mar 9, 2015, at 10:55 PM, Barrett, Carol L <carol.l.barrett at intel.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Shamail - I saw Thierry this AM and  can talk with him. Are we ready now to get on the agenda?
>> 
>> Thanks
>> Carol
>> 
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Shamail [mailto:itzshamail at gmail.com]
>> Sent: Monday, March 09, 2015 7:50 AM
>> To: sean roberts
>> Cc: Barrett, Carol L; product-wg at lists.openstack.org
>> Subject: Re: [Product] Product team at the operator midcycle
>> 
>> Hi Sean,
>> 
>> Did you make contact with Thierry before your cancellation?  Should someone that is attending still do a quick one on one with him?  We should probably try getting on the TC meeting agenda (with ample notice) too.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Shamail
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On Mar 9, 2015, at 10:41 PM, sean roberts <seanroberts66 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> I'd like you to go heavy on project info gained and needed. And very 
>>> light on process and other details that the TC will be agreeing to. I 
>>> want the TC to be able to review and approve before we start publishing their part.
>>> 
>>> On Monday, March 9, 2015, Barrett, Carol L 
>>> <carol.l.barrett at intel.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Sean - Sorry to hear that, best wishes.
>>>> 
>>>> I think our plan is to socialize the Goals, Deliverables and 
>>>> Approach the team has been developing and get feedback on how to 
>>>> make this most useful to the Operators and gather their 
>>>> requirements/use cases as input to the roadmaps.
>>>> 
>>>> Who is here in Philly? Want to meet at 9:30 at the Hub to sync up?
>>>> Carol
>>>> 
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: sean roberts [mailto:seanroberts66 at gmail.com <javascript:;>]
>>>> Sent: Sunday, March 08, 2015 9:30 PM
>>>> To: product-wg at lists.openstack.org <javascript:;>
>>>> Subject: [Product] Product team at the operator midcycle
>>>> 
>>>> I have a family emergency and will not be able to attend the 
>>>> midcycle this time. Carry on without me.
>>>> 
>>>> Can I get an update of what the plan is for this event?
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> ~sean
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Product-wg mailing list
>>>> Product-wg at lists.openstack.org <javascript:;> 
>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/product-wg
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> ~sean
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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