Though I couldn’t be there for the session, I +1 My preference goes (naturally) to “App Developer Support” Bruno On 2016-11-01, 7:26 AM, "Christopher Aedo" <doc at aedo.net> wrote: During one of our work sessions in Barcelona (etherpad here[1]) we discussed the name of our working group and agreed it was overly broad and could use reconsideration. Those in attendance agreed that our purpose, scope and deliverables[2] made sense given goals planned for the next cycle[3]. As far as names go, we briefly discussed the following before agreeing to continue the conversation on the mailing list after the summit: -App Developer Support -App Developer Enabling Any feedback on these? Any others to think about? I think it's also worth discussing whether or not we continue as a working group or transition to a functional team. Nobody currently involved with the App Eco WG was there at it's creation. Since then we've broadened our scope to cover more than just creation of the first-openstack-app guide and chasing improvements in external SDKs. Given the definitions in the UC charter[4] I think we should be operating as a "functional team" rather than a working group. What do you think? -Christopher [1]: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/AppEco_WG_BCN [2]: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Application_Ecosystem_Working_Group [3]: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/app-eco-objectives [4]: http://governance.openstack.org/uc/reference/charter.html _______________________________________________ User-committee mailing list User-committee at lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/user-committee