Open Stack

If this is a need, please let us know so that we can schedule a room for 
you :)

Thanks!
Jimmy

> David F Flanders <mailto:flanders at openstack.org>
> September 19, 2016 at 5:54 PM
> Is there plans for the WG chairs to meet together in Barcelona to make 
> some decisions on these efficiencies?
>
> /me smiles cheekily at a very busy Edgar ;-)
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Flanders | OpenStack Foundation | Community Manager (Cloud Application 
> Communities)
> http://superuser.openstack.org/articles/meet-openstack-s-community-wrangler-david-flanders
> _______________________________________________
> User-committee mailing list
> User-committee at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/user-committee
> Christopher Aedo <mailto:doc at aedo.net>
> September 13, 2016 at 1:31 PM
> On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 7:27 AM, Jimmy Mcarthur<jimmy at tipit.net>  wrote:
>> Christopher,
>>
>> We might be able to lend a hand with the authentication piece if you're able
>> to use OpenStackID.
>>
>> http://docs.openstack.org/infra/system-config/openstackid.html
>> https://github.com/openstack-infra/openstackid
>>
>> If this is something you're interested in, let me know. I believe we can
>> help you out.
>>
>> Thanks!
>> Jimmy McArthur
>>
>
> Jimmy, this is definitely something I'd love to have some help on!
>
> The Lounge is a NodeJS app and is available at
> https://github.com/thelounge/lounge/  They also have an active
> presence on Freenode IRC (#thelounge).
>
> The need is to integrate authentication using OpenStackID.  It should
> be similar to this PR (recently merged) which implemented support for
> authentication against LDAP:
> https://github.com/thelounge/lounge/pull/477 ..
>
> In conversation with the lounge devs on IRC they've indicated they
> would welcome this work, so I don't anticipate any major issues
> getting the code accepted.  They're pretty responsive with
> contributors and have been really friendly in my experience.  Let me
> know if you have questions, and if there's anything more I can to do
> help coordinate this.
>
> -Christopher
>
>
>
>
>> Christopher Aedo
>> September 7, 2016 at 2:34 AM
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 5, 2016 at 3:24 PM, Blair Bethwaite
>> <blair.bethwaite at monash.edu>  wrote:
>>
>> Hi Flanders,
>>
>> Great discussion. Prompted me to go remind myself of the role and/or
>> definition of an OS UC Working Group... I didn't find anything "formal", but
>> w.o.o/UserCommittee says:
>> =====
>> The user committee's role is to represent the needs of the diverse range of
>> OpenStack users. The user committee is advised by Working Groups, each of
>> whom represents different user audiences and interests.
>>
>> The user committee mission is to:
>>
>> Consolidate user requirements and present these to the management board and
>> technical committee[1].
>> Provide guidance for the development teams where user feedback is requested
>> Track OpenStack deployments and usage, helping to share user stories and
>> experiences
>> Work with the user groups worldwide to keep the OpenStack community vibrant
>> and informed
>> =====
>>
>> > From the WG activity perspective I would highlight it is very
>> useful/important to have some direction (as well as support) coming from the
>> UC - I think our experience with the scientific-wg is roughly that we have a
>> large interest base and plenty of people who find good value in talking to
>> and sharing with their peers, but it is quite hard to turn that into
>> concrete forward momentum or to even mint well articulated goals from within
>> the group.
>>
>> On engagement, IRC is useful for reasons already mentioned in this thread
>> (and we've been fortunate to have some valuable interactions thanks some
>> core devs having keyword watches setup on OpenStack channels), but I think
>> we alienate and/or make things too hard for some potential contributors. And
>> I don't think it makes a great watercooler discussion tool (e.g. no offline
>> history etc without setting up a bouncer - and that is fairly opaque even
>> for a CS major).
>>
>> I'm a huge fan of the way we use IRC in the OpenStack community, but
>> have also recognized getting up and running with a persistent IRC
>> connection can pose a significant barrier to many very smart and
>> technically sharp humans.  To that end I wrote a spec to provide a
>> hosted, persistent IRC web-client [1].  Lately however the effort has
>> been stalled due to my lack of experience with JS; if we can find
>> someone who can plumb in the auth piece, we could be up and running
>> with this fairly quickly.
>>
>> I think getting that right will be worth the effort, and could get a
>> whole lot more people engaged across all our various domains.
>>
>> [1] https://review.openstack.org/319506
>>
>> -Christopher
>>
>> Having (myself) done a fairly woeful job of keeping pace with the dev side
>> of OS progression this cycle I'm also interested in exploring ways of
>> highlighting activities/work that may be of interest to any particular WG.
>> The first thing that springs to mind is tagging of blueprints and reviews,
>> e.g., where a dev or other community member is looking for
>> input/support/resolution from a specific target user group. This could be a
>> mechanism we as chairs utilise to surface agenda items, solicit input and
>> then respond on behalf of the group.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Blair
>>
>> On 30 August 2016 at 10:36, David F Flanders<flanders at openstack.org>  wrote:
>>
>> Dear Working Group Co-Chairs and User Committee Chairs,
>>
>> The logistical tasks of running a WG meeting is by no means trivial,
>> here a quick list of things which a co-chairs of a WG do on a weekly
>> basis to run a global meeting:
>>
>> a.) mint calendar invitation to all members (subscribe/unsubscribe
>> members)
>> b.) call for agenda items via etherpad
>> c.) update wiki with upcoming meeting and link to etherpad agenda
>> d.) email user-committee mailing list on when next meeting is
>> occurring along with agenda links
>> e.) assure meeting channel is confirmed (irc/phone/etc)
>> f.) run meeting according to good practices (irc etiquette or well
>> taken notes if via voice)
>> g.) post meeting follow up: circulating actions, posting meeting
>> notes, taking any outstanding queries to the mailing list for
>> consideration, etc.
>> h.) follow up actions.
>> i.) recruit new members
>> j.) plan for summit meetings
>> k.) etc etc.
>>
>> All of the above are sometimes done twice-over at different times to
>> help maintain the conversation in different timezones.
>>
>> In addition, the groups are still not well attended by as diverse an
>> audience as OpenStack represents. AsiaPac, Latin America, India and
>> other massive OpenStack user groups have not yet engaged despite some
>> of their massive communities.
>>
>> One of the recent suggestions has been to converge some of the WGs to
>> help ease the burden of these logistical tasks.
>>
>> Other options include:
>>
>> * having a more systematic approach to when WG occur, i.e. agreeing
>> a set pattern such s a day per fortnight which each WG happens (one
>> after another).
>>
>> * having a shared IRC channel for all WG activity to help create
>> more water-cooler conversation between chairs?
>>
>> * sharing of logistical duties between WG chairs, etc
>>
>> Options abound, though discussion much needed!
>>
>> Q: Is there any good practice we can draw from? I've been digging
>> around my old W3C and IETF notes to see what good practice there may
>> be?
>>
>> Discussion/replies greatly appreciated to see if there is any consensus?
>>
>> Kind Regards,
>>
>> Flanders
>>
>> --
>> Blair Bethwaite
>> Senior HPC Consultant
>>
>> Monash eResearch Centre
>> Monash University
>> Room G26, 15 Innovation Walk, Clayton Campus
>> Clayton VIC 3800
>> Australia
>> Mobile: 0439-545-002
>> Office: +61 3-9903-2800
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> User-committee mailing list
>> User-committee at lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/user-committee
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> User-committee mailing list
>> User-committee at lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/user-committee
>>
>> Blair Bethwaite
>> September 5, 2016 at 5:24 PM
>>
>> Hi Flanders,
>>
>> Great discussion. Prompted me to go remind myself of the role and/or
>> definition of an OS UC Working Group... I didn't find anything "formal", but
>> w.o.o/UserCommittee says:
>> =====
>> The user committee's role is to represent the needs of the diverse range of
>> OpenStack users. The user committee is advised by Working Groups, each of
>> whom represents different user audiences and interests.
>>
>> The user committee mission is to:
>>
>> Consolidate user requirements and present these to the management board and
>> technical committee[1].
>> Provide guidance for the development teams where user feedback is requested
>> Track OpenStack deployments and usage, helping to share user stories and
>> experiences
>> Work with the user groups worldwide to keep the OpenStack community vibrant
>> and informed
>> =====
>>
>>  From the WG activity perspective I would highlight it is very
>> useful/important to have some direction (as well as support) coming from the
>> UC - I think our experience with the scientific-wg is roughly that we have a
>> large interest base and plenty of people who find good value in talking to
>> and sharing with their peers, but it is quite hard to turn that into
>> concrete forward momentum or to even mint well articulated goals from within
>> the group.
>>
>> On engagement, IRC is useful for reasons already mentioned in this thread
>> (and we've been fortunate to have some valuable interactions thanks some
>> core devs having keyword watches setup on OpenStack channels), but I think
>> we alienate and/or make things too hard for some potential contributors. And
>> I don't think it makes a great watercooler discussion tool (e.g. no offline
>> history etc without setting up a bouncer - and that is fairly opaque even
>> for a CS major).
>>
>> Having (myself) done a fairly woeful job of keeping pace with the dev side
>> of OS progression this cycle I'm also interested in exploring ways of
>> highlighting activities/work that may be of interest to any particular WG.
>> The first thing that springs to mind is tagging of blueprints and reviews,
>> e.g., where a dev or other community member is looking for
>> input/support/resolution from a specific target user group. This could be a
>> mechanism we as chairs utilise to surface agenda items, solicit input and
>> then respond on behalf of the group.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Blair
>>
>> On 30 August 2016 at 10:36, David F Flanders<flanders at openstack.org>  wrote:
>>> Dear Working Group Co-Chairs and User Committee Chairs,
>>>
>>> The logistical tasks of running a WG meeting is by no means trivial,
>>> here a quick list of things which a co-chairs of a WG do on a weekly
>>> basis to run a global meeting:
>>>
>>> a.) mint calendar invitation to all members (subscribe/unsubscribe
>>> members)
>>> b.) call for agenda items via etherpad
>>> c.) update wiki with upcoming meeting and link to etherpad agenda
>>> d.) email user-committee mailing list on when next meeting is
>>> occurring along with agenda links
>>> e.) assure meeting channel is confirmed (irc/phone/etc)
>>> f.) run meeting according to good practices (irc etiquette or well
>>> taken notes if via voice)
>>> g.) post meeting follow up: circulating actions, posting meeting
>>> notes, taking any outstanding queries to the mailing list for
>>> consideration, etc.
>>> h.) follow up actions.
>>> i.) recruit new members
>>> j.) plan for summit meetings
>>> k.) etc etc.
>>>
>>> All of the above are sometimes done twice-over at different times to
>>> help maintain the conversation in different timezones.
>>>
>>> In addition, the groups are still not well attended by as diverse an
>>> audience as OpenStack represents. AsiaPac, Latin America, India and
>>> other massive OpenStack user groups have not yet engaged despite some
>>> of their massive communities.
>>>
>>> One of the recent suggestions has been to converge some of the WGs to
>>> help ease the burden of these logistical tasks.
>>>
>>> Other options include:
>>>
>>> * having a more systematic approach to when WG occur, i.e. agreeing
>>> a set pattern such s a day per fortnight which each WG happens (one
>>> after another).
>>>
>>> * having a shared IRC channel for all WG activity to help create
>>> more water-cooler conversation between chairs?
>>>
>>> * sharing of logistical duties between WG chairs, etc
>>>
>>> Options abound, though discussion much needed!
>>>
>>> Q: Is there any good practice we can draw from? I've been digging
>>> around my old W3C and IETF notes to see what good practice there may
>>> be?
>>>
>>> Discussion/replies greatly appreciated to see if there is any consensus?
>>>
>>> Kind Regards,
>>>
>>> Flanders
>> --
>> Blair Bethwaite
>> Senior HPC Consultant
>>
>> Monash eResearch Centre
>> Monash University
>> Room G26, 15 Innovation Walk, Clayton Campus
>> Clayton VIC 3800
>> Australia
>> Mobile: 0439-545-002
>> Office: +61 3-9903-2800
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> User-committee mailing list
>> User-committee at lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/user-committee
>> David F Flanders
>> August 29, 2016 at 7:36 PM
>> Dear Working Group Co-Chairs and User Committee Chairs,
>>
>> The logistical tasks of running a WG meeting is by no means trivial,
>> here a quick list of things which a co-chairs of a WG do on a weekly
>> basis to run a global meeting:
>>
>> a.) mint calendar invitation to all members (subscribe/unsubscribe members)
>> b.) call for agenda items via etherpad
>> c.) update wiki with upcoming meeting and link to etherpad agenda
>> d.) email user-committee mailing list on when next meeting is
>> occurring along with agenda links
>> e.) assure meeting channel is confirmed (irc/phone/etc)
>> f.) run meeting according to good practices (irc etiquette or well
>> taken notes if via voice)
>> g.) post meeting follow up: circulating actions, posting meeting
>> notes, taking any outstanding queries to the mailing list for
>> consideration, etc.
>> h.) follow up actions.
>> i.) recruit new members
>> j.) plan for summit meetings
>> k.) etc etc.
>>
>> All of the above are sometimes done twice-over at different times to
>> help maintain the conversation in different timezones.
>>
>> In addition, the groups are still not well attended by as diverse an
>> audience as OpenStack represents. AsiaPac, Latin America, India and
>> other massive OpenStack user groups have not yet engaged despite some
>> of their massive communities.
>>
>> One of the recent suggestions has been to converge some of the WGs to
>> help ease the burden of these logistical tasks.
>>
>> Other options include:
>>
>> * having a more systematic approach to when WG occur, i.e. agreeing
>> a set pattern such s a day per fortnight which each WG happens (one
>> after another).
>>
>> * having a shared IRC channel for all WG activity to help create
>> more water-cooler conversation between chairs?
>>
>> * sharing of logistical duties between WG chairs, etc
>>
>> Options abound, though discussion much needed!
>>
>> Q: Is there any good practice we can draw from? I've been digging
>> around my old W3C and IETF notes to see what good practice there may
>> be?
>>
>> Discussion/replies greatly appreciated to see if there is any consensus?
>>
>> Kind Regards,
>>
>> Flanders
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> User-committee mailing list
>> User-committee at lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/user-committee
>>
>>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/user-committee/attachments/20160920/53c43d26/attachment-0001.html>