Open Stack

TL;DR = suggested set of tasks which public clouds achieved last year and
which we should review to build upon for next year.

As a starter for ten, here are a few potential working group tasks which
several Public Clouds achieved this previous year (despite lack of the WG
label):

a.) *providing demo accounts for n00b Cloud App Dev Teams *as they
participated in hackathons and local meetup events.  <-- Building on the
500+ CloudApp n00bs who used these accounts it would be great to figure out
a streamlined process for awarding these accounts so as to attract *and
retain* more customers to the public clouds.
OVH had a nice little loyatly card which was passed out in Barcelona.
@Jean-Daniel, could you provide some insight in how this card was organised
and provided?

b. ) *sending trainers to community events *to get cloud app teams going on
the use of Shade as the goto Python library for first time cloud app dev.
@Bruno could you and Josh talk to your experience for how to better propose
training at conferences and the kind of helpers required to run good
training (esp PyCon USA, EuroPython and other Python related events)?

c.) *participation at the summit OpenStack Academy* acting as mentors
during the 'Training Games' and self-paced 'Cloud App Labs' lounge.
@Petter/Gene could you talk further about how the lounge could be improved
for Public Cloud providers so they can more easily win over users by
walking them through the training?
@Joanna could you talk to the training provided and why we need Public
Clouds to have dedicated support for on-boarding new users?

d.) *update, testing and screencasts of how various cloud app interfaces
work atop openstack *(APIs/SDKs, Containers, PaaS and other Cloud App
interfaces).
@Marcella/Victor could you suggest some further ways we could advance how
we get teams of AppDev ready to compete in Hackathons and other events as
virtual learning (vs face to face training).

e.) *shared marketing (data points) for how public clouds can present
themselves at the myriad of local (smaller) events worldwide*,
demonstrating how they are providing an Open set of APIs which make them
the largest cloud in the world, when interoperably federated.
@Mike/Ildiko can you circulate your forthcoming interview to the UK
Universities and why engaging at smaller events is essential for customer
engagement?

All of the above I've highlighted as they have helped achieve the following
for Public Clouds:

1.) help obtain more customers for public clouds,
2.) raise the public cloud profile as greater than the sum of their
(datacentre) parts, and
3.) help jointly advertise and make the wider OpenStack *choice* of the
marketplace known to the world world.

Looking forward to hearing other ideas and building on the above for 2017.

Kind Regards,

David F. Flanders

On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 8:22 PM, matt Jarvis <matt at mattjarvis.org.uk> wrote:

> Absolutely agree with your comments. There's an initial process and
> milestones we will have to go through where we start to identify what those
> outputs can be. We'll define those milestones as part of the first couple
> of meetings.
>
> On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 4:13 AM, David F Flanders <dff.openstack at gmail.com
> > wrote:
>
>> +1 for *quantifiable output(s)* as 'measure of success' for successful
>> working groups.
>>
>> TL;DR= Disclaimer: the below is mostly anecdotal, very happy to engage in
>> a conversation for what others feel are patterns of success for a
>> [User]-WG.
>>
>> For example, WGs which have clear outputs like the following are the ones
>> whose membership increases (as opposed to long-standing 'talk shop' WGs,
>> whose membership slowly fades[1] <-- from my observations).
>>
>> Examples of WG task success IMHO [2]:
>>
>>  - The Scientific-WG (lead by Cambridge Uni) produced the HPC atop
>> OpenStack book, of which ~250 copies were given out at Super Computing,
>> with significant BoF and panels attendance as quantifiable evidence of
>> their success.
>>
>>  - The AppEco-WG (lead by Intel) produced their report / whitePaper on
>> API/SDK usability which lead to the creation ShadeSDK training which has
>> been used to help get 500+ hackathon participants using OpenStack as part
>> of their hacks.
>>
>>  - The Fault-Genes-WG has a database of examples they are curating
>> planned along with accompany white paper.
>>
>> - The Enterprise-WG has an 'Moving Apps to OpenStack' book currently
>> being completed.
>>
>> - The CloudAppHack-WG (with a wonderfully simple remit) provides
>> coordination, advice and guidance to community members who want to run an
>> 'application hackathon' (and connects them with the sponsors required to do
>> so).
>>
>> I'd really like to see the PublicClouds-WG start with, "what are some
>> tasks which group members need to do already as part of their day job, and
>> whom else might want to jump in and help because it benefits their job's
>> remit'.  Often it is 1-3 people who are the driving force behind these
>> outputs with the rest of WG acting as an essential sounding board.
>>
>> [1]= NB there is a good place for WGs who are 'talk shops' as well, but
>> with the understanding that their should be a declared time limit and date
>> for achieving a public declaration (and close of the WG).  See 'Boston Open
>> Science Cloud Congress and forthcoming Declaration' efforts.
>>
>> [2]= As per all my public correspondence, this is me responding in my
>> capacity as a community member (not necessarily the PoV of the Foundation).
>>
>> Best, Flanders
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 6:50 AM, Stefano Maffulli <stefano at openstack.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello folks,
>>>
>>> On 11/15/2016 02:43 AM, matt Jarvis wrote:
>>> > I'd like to propose that, in line with the new process for creation of
>>> > working groups, we set up some initial IRC meetings for all interested
>>> > parties.
>>>
>>> I'll be glad to read summaries and participate to conversations on the
>>> mailing list on this topic. I can't commit to join IRC meetings.
>>>
>>> > The goals for these initial meetings would be :
>>> >
>>> > 1. Define the overall scope and mission statement for the working group
>>>
>>> I would suggest to make sure scope and mission include a very
>>> quantifiable output of the WG, as this is not clear to me at the moment.
>>> What is this group hoping to produce?
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> stef
>>>
>>>
>>> PS I read all the messages on this mailing list, you don't need to
>>> explicitly cc me.
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> OpenStack-operators mailing list
>>> OpenStack-operators at lists.openstack.org
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> =================
>> Twitter: @DFFlanders <https://twitter.com/dfflanders>
>> Skype: david.flanders
>> Based in Melbourne, Australia
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> User-committee mailing list
>> User-committee at lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/user-committee
>>
>>
>


-- 
Flanders | OpenStack Foundation | Community Manager (Cloud Application
Communities)
http://superuser.openstack.org/articles/meet-openstack-s-community-wrangler-david-flanders
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/user-committee/attachments/20161128/e28b7825/attachment.html>