22:06:04 <Patifa> #startmeeting app_ecosystem_wg
22:06:05 <openstack> Meeting started Mon Dec  5 22:06:04 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is Patifa. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
22:06:06 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
22:06:08 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'app_ecosystem_wg'
22:06:11 <Rockyg> o/
22:06:18 <Patifa> Agenda can be found on our etherpad
22:06:18 <Patifa> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/2016_Dec_5_App_Dev_Enablement
22:06:22 <leong_> hi all
22:06:37 <docaedo> o/
22:06:45 <Patifa> hello all... good to see a full room for a change ;)
22:07:27 <dfflanders> 2017 is going to be an important year :)
22:07:44 <Patifa> #topic Improve developer.openstack.org
22:08:04 <vicdiaz> tell us more @dfflanders
22:08:52 <dfflanders> vicdiaz, anon dear sir, anon :)
22:09:22 <olaph> o/
22:10:14 <dfflanders> apologies for missing previous meeting (been on site visit in Sydney, planning summit activities), but wondering dif between audience for devleoper.openstack.org and openstack.org/appdev
22:10:17 <Patifa> So I left the topic in the agenda, I was hoping we could discuss how to act on this since there was not a lot of traction since the summit - neither on the mailing list nor in the meetings
22:10:54 <Patifa> dfflanders that's a good point.. I'm not 100% sure each of those we should be thinkg about impriving...
22:11:54 <Patifa> Both or mentioned at the summit.. I don't have the history behind them
22:12:01 <cbsterrett> Well developer.openstack.org has very little on it
22:12:06 <cbsterrett> mostly just a list of SDK's
22:12:16 <docaedo> we did have an action for reed from the summit "ACTION: Stefano to share on going effort to identify problems for developers" but I think that related to work they were doing at dreamhost so maybe it's still in progress
22:13:03 <docaedo> developer.o.o does seem like a good resource page for folks developing apps intended to interact directly with openstack clouds
22:13:30 <cbsterrett> http://www.openstack.org/appdev/ is somewhat flashy and polished, and has a link back to http://developer.openstack.org/
22:13:33 <leong_> oo/appdev is more on whitepaper, guidebook for AppDev, and it also refer/links to developer.openstack.org
22:13:38 <docaedo> but I'm also not sure if there's a significantly different audience vs. what we are thinking about for openstack.org/appdev
22:13:41 <dfflanders> +1 different audiences for each?
22:13:52 <vicdiaz> same audience
22:14:17 <CarolBarrett> I can't find a page at developer.openstack.org....?
22:14:32 <Patifa> #link http://developer.openstack.org/
22:14:38 <vicdiaz> http://developer.openstack.org/
22:14:42 <leong_> appdev seems more target on very specific app-dev audience.. however, developer.oo seems more generic for anyone who want to interact with openstack api (which can includes ops)
22:15:31 <leong_> that is my understanding and interpretation, correct me if i am wrong
22:16:30 <CarolBarrett> leong: I think that's a good read on it. I think most of the application developers will not use the OpenStack APIs
22:16:53 <docaedo> but in theory don't all developers need the same tools (at least potentially?)  I want to make sure we don't make it harder for people to find info and resources
22:16:54 <leong_> carolbarrett, that would depends on the types of application to build
22:17:21 <leong_> +1 for docaedo
22:17:45 <vicdiaz> +1
22:17:51 <docaedo> My perspective is that there's a spectrum of devs we want to reach here, but if we can keep all the info in one place, it's going to be a lot easier
22:17:52 <leong_> i tends to agree in the direction of "converging" oo/appdev and developer.oo
22:18:01 <Patifa> docaedo is openstack.org the landing page and http://developer.openstack.org/ is part of its content?
22:18:25 <CarolBarrett> leong: +1
22:18:37 <Patifa> leong_ +1
22:19:45 <docaedo> Patifa: actually I'm not even sure what links to developer.o.o ...
22:19:53 <dfflanders> Worth noting the breadcrumb trail for getting to the o.o/appdev page which is: o.o > users > ISV and AppDev > o.o/appdev
22:20:15 <leong_> dfflanders lol
22:21:11 <docaedo> dfflanders: oh that's too easy to find, must be confusing people that land there accidentally...  Need to bury that a few more levels!
22:21:33 <Rockyg> ++1000
22:22:32 <dfflanders> indeed ;-) - having a history on these pages would be helpful.... a potential action for someone perchance to chase on the ML?
22:22:50 <docaedo> haha actually it's not that bad, one click from main page.  Just figure under "Users" might not be obvious, but it's not so terrible
22:24:05 <docaedo> still - not making much progress on actions here :/  Suggestions on things we can do to move this effort forward?
22:24:23 <leong_> speaking on that.. along the line, think openstack.org site itself also need a bit of change..:-)
22:24:24 <dfflanders> Stefano should have a history?
22:25:08 <Patifa> leong_ one lion at a time.
22:25:12 <dfflanders> Also, perhaps if we do an audit of the content currently on both pages = divide and conquer with a little analysis of each in seperate groups <-- sorry thinking out loud
22:25:49 <dfflanders> ^^please suggest amend to approach for analysis of each page?
22:26:33 <leong_> btw, oo/appdev also cover ISV
22:27:15 <Rockyg> reed, you around?
22:27:41 <dfflanders> leong_, yes that's the main question I had re history, as if o.o/appdev is a splash page then it needs to be high level enough to talk to ISV appDev managers as well?
22:27:54 <leong_> i think we got some conversation about putting ISV related content at the oo/appdev almost a year back in the EWG with Kathy
22:28:23 * dfflanders memory jogged = Kathy will have history as well, she mentioned in Barcelona
22:28:59 <leong_> i think it is better to check with Kathy before this WG to propose any changes to oo/appdev
22:29:31 <Patifa> btw the link  "tools & resources" under "why app developers are embracing openstack" takes you to http://developer.openstack.org/
22:29:34 <dfflanders> +1 (and Stefano) on the ML so we can have an open discussion on history and intention of these pages?
22:30:31 <docaedo> Patifa: thanks for finding that.  *that* seems buried, since the info on developer.o.o is pretty useful and relevant
22:30:44 <docaedo> big +1 to bringing this conversation to the mailing list
22:30:57 <cbsterrett> Looking for SDK's also takes you there
22:32:19 <Patifa> I can make a site map, see what content is there so we can have a more productive conversation. dfflanders do you know if anyone would have that info in hand?
22:32:29 <dfflanders> #agreed
22:32:49 <dfflanders> Stefano, Kathy and Allison would be the points of contact
22:33:12 <Patifa> Ok.. I'll contact them.
22:33:34 <Patifa> #action Patifa - Create site map of current content
22:33:59 <dfflanders> Patifa, Perhaps encourage them to engage in convo via ML?
22:34:20 <Patifa> Works for me.
22:35:07 <Patifa> #action Patifa - start thread on ML about the current content and history. Engage Stephano, Kathy and Allisson
22:35:13 <Patifa> how's that?
22:35:30 <vicdiaz> looks good
22:35:48 <dfflanders> Would also be good to get the PoV of Enterprise-WG re ISV audience
22:36:09 <dfflanders> is CarolBarrett or leong_ able to progress?
22:37:32 <CarolBarrett> I'm here - but don't understand the question
22:37:42 <leong_> dfflanders, can u clarify a bit on your Q
22:37:50 <leong_> progress on what?
22:38:30 <dfflanders> for ISV audiences do they need a page to be represented/engaged and is o.o/appdev the right place for that, i.e. what does Entprise-WG think of o.o/app[dev?
22:38:56 <Patifa> they have this: http://www.openstack.org/isv/
22:39:39 <Patifa> Again a link from o.o/appdev
22:39:50 <dfflanders> me likes that page :)
22:39:55 <CarolBarrett> I think there is a need for a page for OpenStack interoperable/compatible Commercial ISVs to be listed...
22:40:20 <CarolBarrett> Other than that, I think the internal Enterprise App developers are the same as the broader app dev audience
22:40:43 <leong_> carolbarrett, we should bring that question up in tmr EWG meeting and clarify with Kathy
22:40:56 <leong_> unfortunately i have a training conflict and can't attend tmr EWG meeting
22:41:13 <CarolBarrett> leong: sounds good.
22:41:24 <dfflanders> timecheck = 19min remaining.
22:42:39 <leong_> along the line in this topic, i want to bring attention to this team about the EWG workload reference architecture work.
22:42:46 <Patifa> action for you CarolBarrett? Check with Kathy there is a need for a page for OpenStack interoperable/compatible Commercial ISVs to be listed on the EWG meeting
22:43:16 <leong_> we are in the process/proposal to move the development of EWG workload reference architecture into github
22:43:25 <Rockyg> leong_, ++
22:43:49 <leong_> so potentially can be some inter-related content in this group (or oo/appdev or developers.oo
22:43:53 <dfflanders> Patifa, in your sitemap it would be good to have something which shows all the pages related to cloud app people so we can know all the places where the various cloud app team audiences might land?
22:44:34 <leong_> for your references on the email: http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/enterprise-wg/2016-December/000470.html
22:45:04 <leong_> #link EWG Workload Reference Architecture: http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/enterprise-wg/2016-December/000470.html
22:45:25 <Patifa> dfflanders my site map will be a mere reflection of what is there today. I was thinking about using it to help us define what is missing and where it should be.
22:46:14 <docaedo> Patifa: I would think Kathy might already have that?  I expect foundation folks must keep that stuff around somehow/somewhere
22:46:23 <dfflanders> Patifa, kewl, anything to help us see the overall picture of how we are engaging app dev is helpful to get us going.
22:46:52 <Patifa> that's what I thought docaedo...
22:49:27 <dfflanders> Also FYI, I'm working on minting a new page for listing hackathons including a kit of resources for how to host a cloud app hackathon, scaffold is up, content forthcoming: https://www.openstack.org/community/events/openstackhackathons
22:49:45 <dfflanders> ^^this page will eventually be owned by cloudAppHack-WG
22:50:15 <cbsterrett> leong: Do you have a specific ask, or is that just for reference
22:50:21 <dfflanders> timecheck: 10min remaining
22:50:50 <Patifa> dfflanders and leong_ maybe the next step after evaluating what we have is to try to list what we'd like to have.. that is a discussion we can start right away on the ML
22:51:04 <leong_> sure patifa
22:51:32 <Patifa> and hackathons as well as the workload reference is part of that content
22:52:42 <Patifa> docaedo do you want that AR, call for content?
22:52:56 <Patifa> anyone else?
22:53:19 <dfflanders> analysis work is good if timeboxed, but should be careful of yak shaving and make sure our objective is to sort either/both o.o/appdev and/or developer.o.o <-- minimum viable product then iterate.
22:53:37 <docaedo> Patifa: I can't take any ARs at the moment, plate over-full I think for a bit
22:53:51 <docaedo> (I mean, I can take one and try to squeeze it in of course :p )
22:53:53 <Patifa> no problem. :D
22:54:54 <Patifa> 5 min
22:54:56 <dfflanders> 5min
22:55:03 <dfflanders> snap!
22:55:33 <Patifa> #topic Working more closely with other related Working Groups
22:56:17 <Patifa> I started a doodle to find time to chat with the other leads but we don't seem to have a good date this week. I'll do another one with more weeks...
22:57:10 <Patifa> docaedo dfflanders CarolBarrett do you think we'll be able to meet before end of the year? should I keep trying or leave it to 2017
22:57:20 <dfflanders> Patifa, do you think we could have the conversation directly on the ML?  The timezone diff is going to be painful
22:57:21 <docaedo> yeah this week is terrible for me but next week is more open (though after that I'm kind of planning to fade out for the year ;) )
22:57:35 <docaedo> +1 for mailing list
22:58:01 <docaedo> dfflanders: however, sadly, I find the members of user committee mailing list are not very great at engaging in conversation on the mailing list.  Maybe we need to spice up the conversation a little bit
22:58:11 <leong_> +1 on mailiing list
22:58:16 <docaedo> I'm *great* at clickbait titles for subjects, perhaps that's the angle we need to take...
22:58:37 <dfflanders> can we get everyone to commit to engaging in a conversation on the ML, even if just +1/-1 ?
22:58:49 <Patifa> +1
22:59:06 <cbsterrett> +1
22:59:25 <Patifa> but I was hoping to have a conversation with the leads... since we don't seem to be getting a lot of tracking on the ML latelly...
22:59:33 <docaedo> I'll join in on the ML, regardless of schedule
22:59:49 <dfflanders> address your post in the ML to the leads, Dear Michael, Gonzaolo, Carol, etc.
22:59:56 <docaedo> Patifa: maybe call those leads out specifically on the mailing list too?  Maybe not terrible to say that you wanted to
23:00:02 <docaedo> oh haha, yeah, do what dfflanders was typing!
23:00:10 <dfflanders> snap
23:00:28 <Patifa> hahaha... ok... another AR for me then
23:00:38 <dfflanders> docaedo, Patifa can we get an action for all on meeting bot?
23:00:58 <dfflanders> we are at time.
23:01:02 <Patifa> #action Patifa - Start conversation on ML about Working more closely with other related Working Groups - calling out WG leads
23:01:03 <dfflanders> good to have a full house again, see y'all on the ML to talk website history soon ;-)
23:01:05 <docaedo> (I'll let Patifa type that AR)
23:01:23 <docaedo> yep, looking forward to following along on the ML and chiming in
23:01:26 <Patifa> #endmeeting