Open Stack

Thanks Jon, those are some useful points to bear in mind.  I also fully understand Blair’s point of view, it may be that (even with helpful cheat sheets) IRC becomes a barrier to entry for widening participation.  I use IRC every week, but that’s not enough for me to enjoy using it.  Jumping on IRC doesn’t tend to make me smile.

Can we find a comfort zone for everyone with the three forums for communication we have as standard:

- Face-to-face: Working group sessions at operators meetups
- Email: Operators and user committee mailing lists
- IM: IRC (I also prefer using Slack but understand people’s comments from this thread)

I hope that we can.  Perhaps we should try for a while and reexamine the options if we find it’s not working?

Best wishes,
Stig


> On 2 May 2016, at 16:52, Jonathan Proulx <jon at csail.mit.edu> wrote:
> 
> 
> So I have a couple of hats to wear in this discussion.
> 
> 
> As a User Committee Member: 
> 
> There is not yet any defined communications standards.  Going forward
> in the scope of the Recognition Working Group
> (https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/NonATCRecognition) measurable
> participation in Team and Working Group activities is one of the
> metrics being looked at.  For Operator recognition in Austin this was
> done by scraping IRC logs.
> 
> So there's some assumptions around IRC but not current policies.
> 
> My main considerations in this space a a UC memeber are:
> 
> 1) Does the communication method work for the people who want to be
> involved
> 
> 2) Is it transparent to the rest of the community
>   2.1) easy to join
>   2.2) logged
> 
> Anything that meets the second point would probably also be sufficient
> to the recognition issue.
> 
> 
> As a Cloud Operator/Architect/Crotchety_Old_$EXPLETIVE in an accademic
> research context(ie me):
> 
> I really like text (irc, xmpp). I've not used Slack but from here it
> look like it is primarily used like a proprietary hosted XMPP service.
> Which intern is a lot like a private IRC system but with automated
> logging that provides better history and searchibilty from the client
> than IRC. At CSAIL we run ejabberd for interal team comms for this
> reason. Based on my experience it's a pretty trivial service to
> operate, and I'd rather see the foundation operating it's own FOSS
> service than buying into some opaque proprietary external service.
> 
> I really dislike conference calls and worse video conferences
> (hangouts, webex, etc...) and to the extent possible avoid those and
> things that use them.  Aside from my personal and slightly irrational
> hatred of these interactions, I do think there's some practical reason
> to prefer text:
> 
> * Audio communication is much more difficult than written
>  communication when participants are less fluent in the meeting
>  language.
> * Audio/video is larger to archive and more difficult (nearly
>  impossible) to search
> * If you do manage to store them in a searhcable way formats are less
>  standard (and thus more liekly to bit rot into unusibility) than text
> 
> These aren't insurmountable problems.  I know the Spoken Languages
> people a couple floors above me have some neat tools in this space
> (indexing and transcribing lectures)
> 
> On Sun, May 01, 2016 at 05:48:37AM +1000, Blair Bethwaite wrote:
> :Hi all,
> :
> :Following on from the inaugural scientific-wg, Stig and I as co-chairs
> :need to organise a regular meeting schedule going forward. Anita
> :provided some useful advice/pointers here - thanks!
> :
> :I understand the infra team has various useful processes setup around
> :IRC meetings, however I (and others) are concerned that IRC will be a
> :barrier to entry for some folks wishing to participate in this forum -
> :our own community cloud has experienced this, with Slack very quickly
> :and popularly replacing IRC (note I'm not particularly advocating
> :Slack itself here, there are a number of options).
> :
> :Before we consider this further ourselves I'm wondering if this has
> :already been discussed or is being considered by the core
> :user-committee? I imagine this is something that will need to be
> :addressed soon as the user-committee births new (not-as-technical)
> :community working groups.
> :
> :-- 
> :Cheers,
> :~Blairo
> :
> :_______________________________________________
> :User-committee mailing list
> :User-committee at lists.openstack.org
> :http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/user-committee
> 
> --