Open Stack

Agree with Melvin here. Another suggestion is to put the BoF on the 
schedule if you think it can garner enough attendance. As Melvin 
suggests, grab a co-presenter/moderator or two. I would also suggest 
attending sessions that you think might have an audience that would be a 
fit for you BoF and letting people know about the discussion.
> Melvin Hillsman <mailto:mrhillsman at gmail.com>
> March 28, 2017 at 6:32 PM
> Hey Adam,
>
> Might I suggest simply suggesting the session via 
> http://forumtopics.openstack.org
>
> You will want to ensure that you or another person who is keen to get 
> the feedback you think is relevant can moderate the session as well.
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Kind regards,
>
> Melvin Hillsman
> Ops Technical Lead
> OpenStack Innovation Center
>
> mrhillsman at gmail.com <mailto:mrhillsman at gmail.com>
> phone: (210) 312-1267
> mobile: (210) 413-1659
> http://osic.org
>
> Learner | Ideation | Belief | Responsibility | Command
> Adam Spiers <mailto:aspiers at suse.com>
> March 28, 2017 at 7:12 AM
> Hi there,
>
>
>
> There is no official Working Group for High Availability, but in my
> (admittedly biased) experience as the chair of the weekly HA IRC
> meetings, the lack of a designated space for HA discussions has been a
> problem in pretty much every one of the 9 conference-summits and PTG
> I've attended.  I raised this last year:
>
>    
> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2016-August/100570.html 
>
>
> Pretty much all the topics I mentioned in that mail are still
> relevant.  The difficulty in coordinating the right kinds of
> discussions between the right kind of people is that OpenStack HA is a
> mixed pot of topics which overlap to very different degrees.  For
> example the use of technologies such as Pacemaker and tooz potentially
> span multiple projects, as does feedback from operators[0], whereas
> other HA topics can be entirely specific to one project (Neutron is a
> good example of this).
>
> Feedback from operators to developers on HA is one area I would
> particularly like to see more space for.  For example, there was a
> very interesting HA-oriented session at the recent MIL ops meetup:
>
>    https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/MIL-ops-rabbitmq-pitfalls-ha
>
> Unfortunately I was not at the event so I don't know how many upstream
> developers attended the session, or if there was any feedback sent to
> developers as a consequence.  And conversely, there didn't seem to be
> many operators at the Atlanta PTG.  But the main conference events
> could serve as a great opportunity for connecting operators with
> developers for these kinds of discussions.
>
> I'm hesitant to propose a new HA working group, because I doubt
> there'd be sufficient cohesion of interests across the whole group,
> and it might well be overkill.  A BoF approach would probably make
> more sense, but I have to admit I don't have a lot of experience in
> coordinating these kinds of face-to-face discussions, so any advice on
> how best to handle this would be most welcome!
>
> Thanks,
> Adam
> Jimmy McArthur <mailto:jimmy at openstack.org>
> March 27, 2017 at 1:41 PM
> Good day!
>
> We are putting a call out to any additional Working Groups that might 
> require space for the OpenStack Summit Boston, May 8-11th!  The 
> initial call was for official working groups, but we have additional 
> space that we would love to fill with other Working Groups in need.
>
> Please submit all space requests to speakersupport at openstack.org. All 
> we need is the name of your Working Group and the person that will be 
> adding the presentation details. We will fill them in the order 
> received and send instructions for logging in and entering your data.  
> All requests must be received by Friday, March 31.
>
> If we have additional room (and we likely will), we will open it up to 
> BoFs.
>
> Thank you!
> Jimmy McArthur & Erin Disney
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20170329/782c229f/attachment.html>