21:03:30 <ttx> #startmeeting crossproject
21:03:31 <openstack> Meeting started Tue May 12 21:03:30 2015 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is ttx. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
21:03:32 <edleafe> ttx: :)
21:03:33 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
21:03:34 <ttx> SergeyLukjanov: WAT
21:03:35 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'crossproject'
21:03:43 <edleafe> o/
21:03:48 <ttx> SergeyLukjanov: I hope that's temporary
21:03:56 <ttx> Today's agenda:
21:04:03 <ttx> #link http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings/CrossProjectMeeting
21:04:07 <SergeyLukjanov> ttx, yeah, I'll back to UTC+3 in early June
21:04:18 * ttx likes to overlap with Sergey
21:04:29 <ttx> (nothing dirty)
21:04:35 <ttx> #topic Design Summit last-minute checks (ttx)
21:04:54 * ttx checks if we have Magnum track content up
21:05:16 <dhellmann> dims, Rockyg: did we sort out the conflicts in the various logging sessions?
21:05:16 <ttx> Right, so at this hour we are only missing the Magnum track contents
21:05:17 <devananda> ironic content isn't up yet. was on my agenda to publish last night, but didn't get to it yet
21:05:27 <ttx> sdake is working on it
21:05:28 <Rockyg> not sure...
21:05:29 <dims> dhellmann: y i believe so
21:05:33 <dhellmann> dims: cool, thanks
21:05:38 <Rockyg> Thanks, dims
21:05:45 <ttx> devananda: Ironic seems to have titles up and all
21:05:58 <ttx> So... The production crew has been asking me to freeze the content soon, so that they can start preparing the digital signage
21:06:11 <ttx> We can still push changes up to the same day, but we'll need to let them know
21:06:22 <ttx> To this effect, I plan to disable Cheddar at the end of the day Wednesday
21:06:24 <devananda> ttx: gimme 10 min and I'l lhave it updated
21:06:31 <johnthetubaguy> ttx: how do we let them know?
21:06:52 <ttx> johnthetubaguy: you don't, you go through me for the changes and I notify them
21:06:57 <ttx> So we should work on the last-minute changes today or tomorrow
21:07:14 <johnthetubaguy> ttx: cool, sounds good
21:07:24 <ttx> and after that you can send me email and I'll make manual changes and notify the production crew
21:07:34 <ttx> Is there any last-minute conflict we should work on solving ?
21:08:04 <ttx> I think I heard someone mentioning one in some channel
21:08:32 <ttx> bauzas, ajo: ?
21:08:52 <bauzas> aloha ?
21:09:11 <bauzas> oh, related to the gantt meeting ?
21:09:12 <ttx> bauzas: you mentioned a conflict earlier today on this channel
21:09:26 <ttx> is that unrelated to the design summit ?
21:09:48 <bauzas> yeah, there is a neutron qos session happening at the same time than a nova session making me unable to attend both
21:10:05 <ttx> bauzas: link ? maybe we can get some arrangement
21:10:35 <ttx> bauzas: FTR there are Nova sessions in every time slot, so...
21:10:42 <bauzas> ttx: well, I was not hoping any solution :)
21:10:49 <bauzas> ttx: yup, that's the point
21:10:54 <ttx> bauzas: I'm fine with no solution
21:11:09 <johnthetubaguy> sadly those scheduler ones have a particular order
21:11:11 <ttx> Also apparently we have a problem with the addition of extra tracks ("Also appears in...")
21:11:11 <bauzas> ttx: I mean, I don't want to change anything since it could create a conflict too
21:11:20 <ttx> We do the right Sched API call but sometimes it just doesn't stick
21:11:24 <ttx> I blame the cloud
21:11:34 <ttx> So if you have sessions you would like to make appear in other tracks, let me know and I'll add those directly in Sched
21:11:42 <jungleboyj> o/
21:11:45 <bauzas> johnthetubaguy: well, the problem is on Thurs for the flavor and image session in Nova
21:12:24 <bauzas> ttx: thanks for the proposal, but we can leave the sessions as they are
21:12:26 <johnthetubaguy> bauzas: that would cover qos, too I guess, but yeah, tricky
21:12:50 <ttx> johnthetubaguy: also moving things around at this point kind of breaks people that already selected sessions
21:12:57 <bauzas> ttx: johnthetubaguy: we will probably provide a BoF for anyone wanting to discuss on x-project scheduling
21:13:03 <johnthetubaguy> ttx: yeah, +1
21:13:14 <ttx> bauzas: ack
21:13:20 <ttx> Last thing, you should bootstrap the etherpads for your sessions and list them at:
21:13:24 <ttx> #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Summit/Liberty/Etherpads
21:13:29 <bauzas> ttx: that's my point, I don't want to break anything just for me
21:13:34 <ttx> That lets people start putting things to discuss while their minds are still clear
21:13:42 <ttx> And win precious time next week
21:13:54 <ttx> Questions on that ?
21:14:29 <ttx> #info Cheddar will be brought down and Design Summit schedule soft-frozen at EOD Wednesday, push your last changes in before then
21:15:09 <ttx> Alright, if there are no questions and no conflicts to solve, I guess we are good to go
21:15:16 <ttx> #topic Product Work Group Pre-Summit Roadmap Review (Shamail Tahir, Mike Cohen, Carl Barrett)
21:15:44 <ttx> Shamail: barrett: around?
21:15:45 <Shamail> Good afternoon, thanks for giving us a moment of your time again this week.  We greatly appreciate it.
21:15:46 <barrett> Hi - Carol here
21:15:50 <Shamail> hi ttx
21:15:50 <geoffarnold> o/
21:15:56 <Shamail> hi geoffarnold
21:16:03 <Shamail> and ofc barrett
21:16:12 <Shamail> The Product WG has two breakout sessions planned for the upcoming OpenStack conference in Vancouver and we plan to share the aggregated PTL feedback received so far in a session called "What's Next in OpenStack? A Glimpse at The Roadmap" (the team will definitely make it known that the active word in the title is glimpse).
21:16:22 <Shamail> #link http://openstacksummitmay2015vancouver.sched.org/event/59009be478783e619d3f949b6e6e3b55
21:16:37 <Shamail> The reason we wanted some time on your agenda today is to show you a preview of the "roadmap" section of our presentation to ensure that the cross project team (including the PTLs) has a chance to provide us feedback prior to this content reaching a broader audience.
21:17:00 <Shamail> Here is a draft version of only the "roadmap" slides for our session on Monday, the actual deck will also set some context about the group.
21:17:02 <Shamail> #link https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1ecgIygeGb5RJT4ASjyDTSV_TGKc2d-8YjFc3D2KhcSg
21:17:14 * ttx reads
21:17:26 <Shamail> First and foremost, we kept the actual PTL feedback (verbatim) in our etherpad and the link is provided at the end.  We do, however, believe that providing the session attendees with a summary of the actual feedback may be the most impactful of delivering the content.
21:17:48 <Shamail> Our eventual goal is to serve both the user and developer communities (this may require maintaining two roadmaps) but we believe that our primary audience for this particular session will be users/operators and therefore we choose to prioritize the inclusion of changes that will be of more direct impact to people in these roles.  We leveraged the PTL feedback and established "top 3" priorities for each projec
21:17:48 <Shamail> t either based on the PTL stating that something was a priority or because it was a "big rock" that required a significant portion of the project team to achieve.
21:18:04 <Shamail> We also broke down the summary into three views with varying levels of details: 30K foot, 10K foot, and 30 foot.
21:18:20 <Shamail> The 30K foot view focuses more on showing which themes are targeted by the various projects (again based on priority/summarized feedback) and this view can also be used to see which release has more focus on a desired theme for the user/operator.
21:18:34 <Shamail> The 10K foot view summarizes how each release/project aligns with the themes (e.g. allows a user to see all the changes across a release instead of theme or project).
21:18:44 <Shamail> The 30 foot view provides a per project summary of all changes in a project across releases (no theme-based view).
21:18:58 <Shamail> The ASK:  Can you please review the proposed roadmap slides and give us feedback.
21:19:01 <Shamail> Carol (Barrett), do you want to add anything?
21:19:23 <johnthetubaguy> Shamail: do you want feedback in comments in the doc?
21:19:43 <Shamail> That would be ideal, can you also specify your project affliation?
21:19:52 <Shamail> in the doc, when leaving the comment
21:20:28 <barrett> A couple of things, I'd like to add. 1st a comment on roadmaps: The roadmap that we are using in Vancouver session is a readout of PTL feedback. The Board has asked us to work towards a multi-release roadmap (along with work flow and process) before Tokyo.  This glimpse roadmap is a starting point, but the final roadmap will be different.
21:21:00 <johnthetubaguy> barrett: we don't really agree the liberty priorities till the end of the summit
21:21:08 <johnthetubaguy> not sure how that fits with the presentation
21:21:23 * jogo notes PTL's do not decide what gets done
21:21:29 <etoews> Shamail: when you say "user and developer communities" what exactly to do mean? user==ops & developer==openstack contributor?
21:21:37 <barrett> understand - we'll update the roadmap after the design summit is complete
21:22:14 <Shamail> etoews: yes, example would be that OpenStack contributors might want to know about the availability of a certain API or library... It may not be relevant to the user/ops.
21:22:27 <Shamail> both might have their own desired value from the document
21:22:40 <bknudson> if we made a roadmap 6 months ago for keystone I don't think it would match what got done.
21:22:49 <Shamail> johnthetubaguy: The concept is to present what are items on the teams mind (we chose the PTL since they are in touch with the core and community)
21:23:11 <barrett> jogo: out goal is to work with the PTLs and developer community to gain alignment on priorities so we can all collectively have targets for each release.
21:23:38 <Shamail> we are not saying that this is a done deal since everything is driven by project agreement during the release cycle.   It's giving users an idea of what might be the next area a team wants to address (not will address)
21:23:54 <johnthetubaguy> so we are doing lots of alignment during the design summit
21:23:56 <etoews> Shamail: there are more audiences for the product working group than that. 1 sec. lemme dig something up.
21:23:56 <jogo> barrett: right, but doing that through the PTLs as the middle man for that doesn't really work IMHO
21:24:10 <barrett> bknudson: And that's OK. The roadmap shows directionally where we are heading, it will be dynamic and change. No problem
21:24:17 <Shamail> etoews: agreed, I really like Tim Bell's message to the user committee.
21:24:32 <johnthetubaguy> Now I do like the idea of this approach, but I need to collect thoughts from all the devs first
21:24:36 <ttx> jogo: one other issue is that the data comes from the previous cycle PTL
21:24:45 <barrett> jogo: we're not trying to make the PTLs the middle man. We're trying to work with the PTLs, User Committee, other Community work groups to bring this about
21:25:05 <Shamail> johnthetubaguy: +1 and we also would like to collect feedback on the process and finding a balance between what's comfortable and needed.
21:25:18 <jogo> barrett: I assume you are working with the companies that pay the vast majority o developers ?
21:25:29 <barrett> Shamail +1
21:25:34 <barrett> Jogo +1
21:25:41 <Rockyg> First round of this will likely be really off, but we will circle back and see what works and what doesn't each round.  It should get better over time
21:25:51 <jogo> Shamail: as a list of useful things to work on this sounds nice
21:26:12 <Shamail> We wanted to share this content since we want to show it during the summit almost as a "preview" to the actual multi-release roadmap.  As we embark on that journey, cross project and project teams will be front and center in helping us shape how we should build/deliver the information.
21:26:17 <johnthetubaguy> I see stating we are doing this is the first thing, and thats great
21:26:35 <Shamail> We also need to figure out how to close the feedback loop and work on development help for use-cases, but that's a topic for another day. :)
21:26:42 <barrett> Can we get your comments on the roadmap by end of Thursday?
21:27:02 <dhellmann> Shamail: we have a bunch of tools in place for tracking blueprints already, are you looking at those?
21:27:02 <johnthetubaguy> yep, I can try add mine by then
21:27:06 <Rockyg> Yup.  First round, collect the data and the thoughts on how the future will go, then start adjusting based on accumulated data and practice
21:27:15 <etoews> Shamail: yep. and you might want to include a slide early on in your deck delineating the different audiences. "user and developer" mean different things depending on your perspective in openstack-land
21:27:27 <ttx> Also the same group will work on consolidating needs and wishlists from various SIGs, so that would be another data point
21:27:29 <Shamail> We have a lot of work to do before Tokyo on how to obtain common feedback, workflow, alignment with cross project, feedback loop, how to help with developers to work on use-cases, etc.  The roadmap presented today is just a glimpse and not our actual deliverable.
21:27:31 <etoews> Shamail: i did this a couple of summit ago http://image.slidesharecdn.com/yousirsirvey-140519093410-phpapp01/95/you-sir-sir-vey-12-638.jpg?cb=1400492383
21:27:35 <Shamail> etoews: +1, good feedback
21:27:36 <barrett> johnthetubaguy: thanks
21:27:48 <ttx> and a good way to check that the two are not completely orthogonal
21:27:54 <Shamail> etoews: I will "borrow" that
21:28:00 <etoews> +1
21:28:05 <Rockyg> dhellmann: do you have a pointer to those tools?
21:28:15 <Shamail> We have two sessions at the summit
21:28:20 <Shamail> the first session will focus on the content shown today
21:28:23 <dhellmann> ttx: I can't find my bookmark to the page that shows in progress blueprints, do you have that handy?
21:28:35 <Shamail> the second session will focus on the group itself (charter, goal, workflow, next steps, etc)
21:28:35 <barrett> For the Glimpse session, we think it would be very helpful  if a couple of PTLs could be there to help field questions. It is on Monday at 11:15 in room 110.
21:28:39 <ttx> dhellmann: that would be the release status page
21:28:48 <ttx> dhellmann: still stuck on Kilo though
21:28:50 <dhellmann> Rockyg: launchpad, for one: https://launchpad.net/oslo
21:28:57 <ttx> http://status.openstack.org/release/
21:28:59 <dhellmann> ttx: right, that's the link I can never remember where it :-)
21:29:15 <barrett> The Cross Project work session is scheduled for Monday from 3:40 – 4:40 in room 212. We’re going to focus on defining how we work together and process flow. Would be valuable to have some folks from this group join that session too.
21:29:21 <loquacities> i can probably make it, for docs
21:29:25 <ttx> dhellmann: one of the Liberty ideas is to stop predicting and just counting the points after the battle^Wmilestone is over
21:29:30 <Shamail> dhellmann: yes, I did look at those... it would be great to figure out how to streamline parsing.  The challenge is that we have the data (since everything is BP or spec) but parsing without project background makes it very hard.
21:29:37 <barrett> loquacities: thanks
21:29:40 <Shamail> Whats user, whats internal, why was something done, etc
21:29:45 <jogo> ttx: sounds like this group will do the predicting for now on
21:29:59 <dhellmann> Shamail: yep, there's a lot going on
21:30:16 <barrett> dhellmann ++
21:30:30 <ttx> jogo: well, I'm happy to abandon it to them. People were expecting exact data from me and we just can't provide that, so better not provide it at all
21:30:56 <ttx> At least predictions will look like predictions
21:31:03 <dhellmann> ttx: ++
21:31:03 <ttx> not as commitments
21:31:06 <Rockyg> ttx:  ++
21:31:15 <Shamail> ttx: ++
21:31:30 <fungi> "criswell predicts openstack"
21:31:32 <barrett> ttx ++
21:31:33 <Shamail> We jokingly added a disclaimer but, in reality, it is needed to build a buffer.
21:31:50 <ttx> Also I see a lot of potential with comparing the priorty lists as expressed by the various SIGs
21:32:01 <barrett> ttx ++
21:32:09 <ttx> with the 10Kfeet goals as expressed by the PTLs/Devs
21:32:20 <ttx> and check that the two are not completely orthogonal
21:32:31 <ttx> and raise a flag if they are
21:32:40 <Shamail> ttx: that would be great, it would help us by acting more as messengers than having to inject opinion through paraphrasing
21:32:51 <johnthetubaguy> the SIG priorities are a great input to picking design summit sessions
21:32:55 <Rockyg> it may also be useful to identify where specs are needed to achieve a priority
21:33:08 <ttx> right
21:33:10 <barrett> Rockyg +1
21:33:20 <ttx> Shamail: i nthe future we may want to discuss timing
21:33:39 <johnthetubaguy> Rockyg: do you mean this, in the Nova sense? http://docs.openstack.org/developer/nova/devref/kilo.blueprints.html#when-is-a-blueprint-needed
21:33:42 <ttx> ideally we need as much priority input as possible pre-summit, to help with the selection of design summit sessions
21:33:43 <Shamail> Shameless Plug: Please join the cross project meeting for the Product WG.. This conversation IRL would be great.
21:33:55 <barrett> ttx: we're hoping to do that at the cross project session.
21:34:02 <johnthetubaguy> we have "backlog" specs that no one has used yet, that could be useful to capture some ideas
21:34:13 <Shamail> link to any samples?
21:34:19 <Shamail> sorry, that was for johnthetubaguy
21:34:21 <barrett> jonthetubaguy: were do we find those?
21:34:22 <Rockyg> johnthetubaguy: more like "it's a priority, but nobody has done anything to define it yet"
21:34:23 <ttx> barrett: I'd argue it's too late to influence the design summit topic selection. May influence the discussions, but not really more
21:35:00 <barrett> ttx: Agree, we've done what we could ahead of the design summit to influence Liberty.
21:35:01 <Rockyg> ttx:  this time, yes.
21:35:08 <ttx> barrett: for example the consolidated SIG priority list is useful input one month before summit, not one day before summit
21:35:15 <johnthetubaguy> Shamail: we don't have any sample backlog ones yet, working with the ops folks to make add some this time
21:35:21 <Shamail> We will definitely want to have further discussions in Vancouver and beyond.... We also appreciate any feedback on this specific content since it's for a breakout session that happens on Monday. :)
21:35:30 <johnthetubaguy> Shamail: other projects might have some
21:35:30 <ttx> right, not blaiming the timing for this time, just food for thoughts next time
21:35:35 <Shamail> thanks johnthetubaguy, i'll keep an eye out for them.  I think they would be a useful tool.
21:35:39 <ttx> blaming*
21:35:41 <barrett> ttx: agree. I think we should try to publish is as soon after a release is made as possible
21:35:43 <Shamail> ttx: thanks.
21:35:49 <johnthetubaguy> ttx: +1 on the ideas for next time
21:35:57 <johnthetubaguy> also, no we know this is a thing, we can talk about it
21:36:07 <johnthetubaguy> so we have a better idea what will go in those slots next time
21:36:09 <Rockyg> ttx: always hardest to get the ball moving.  Static friction versus dynamic :-)
21:36:15 <ttx> Alright, anything else on that topic ?
21:36:26 <Shamail> ttx: point about PTL changes are valid, we even have to figure out when we should ask for feedback in a release cycle since the dust doesn't start settling until *-milestone 2
21:36:38 <ttx> We don't have another topic to discuss so we can continue a bit on this one
21:36:40 <barrett> One thing we'll need help figuring out, is how we prioritize the inputs. This will be a topic at the cross project session.
21:36:59 <Shamail> ttx: Please provide feedback by Thursday if at all possible.  That's all from me. :]  Thanks again for your time.
21:37:11 <Rockyg> Shamail:  we can look at the specs and bps for milestone 1 and see if the priorities are targetted...
21:37:24 <jogo> ttx:  I am not sure having the list of SIG (I assume that means employers) priorities would help. As the good ones will have already introduced the ideas to the community as needed
21:37:28 <ttx> barrett: the work group session on Monday is at the same time as my talk, so I'll have to skip, unfortunately
21:37:45 <barrett> Rockyg: Let's discuss in our work session earlier on Monday
21:37:52 <johnthetubaguy> barrett: I would be fine with a big list of input, without priorities, rather than nothing like now
21:37:54 <ttx> jogo: SIG = TelcoWG, Win the Enterprise and other special interest lobbying groups in openstack
21:37:56 <jogo> I see more value in different SIGs alligning on efforts
21:37:56 <Shamail> Rockyg: +1, we will need consistency in when we start aggregating (let's bring it up on WG session)
21:38:12 <barrett> ttx: bummer...maybe catch-up sometime during the Summit or week after to discuss?
21:38:14 <ttx> jogo: so not necessarily employers (unfortunately)
21:38:15 <jogo> ttx: ohhhh, that is even worse .... requests for things without anyone to do it
21:38:37 <ttx> jogo: right, that's why it's just an input.
21:38:53 * jogo notes how badly special interest groups impact the US Govt.
21:38:55 <barrett> johnthetubaguy: We can definitlely do a long list. But I think the priorities are going to be helpful, since many things will be cross project
21:39:03 <ttx> jogo: and why I expect a bit of a lack in alignment with devs priorities
21:39:13 <johnthetubaguy> barrett: totally
21:39:30 <johnthetubaguy> barrett: but a flat list is a step forward already
21:39:42 <Rockyg> johnthetubaguy: ++
21:40:05 <Shamail> See all of you in Vancouver hopefully
21:40:08 <ttx> barrett: oh wait, when is the working group session ?
21:40:16 <ttx> I may be confused
21:40:40 <Shamail> Our Product WG cross project session is Monday 05/18 3:40 PM  - 4:40 PM
21:40:50 <barrett> ttx: there's a team working session on Monday from 2:00 - 3:30
21:40:51 <ttx> ah no, not confused
21:41:22 <jogo> ttx: yeah this should be interesting, esp. since dev priorities come from devs+ the people why pay them already
21:41:25 <barrett> Followed by a cross project working session from 3:40 - 4:40
21:41:34 <barrett> Shamail: Think your times are off
21:42:04 <barrett> Thanks folks - see you in BC!
21:42:18 <Shamail> barrett: I will defer to you.  We talked about my amazing organization skills for summit chedule
21:42:39 <barrett> shamail: LOL
21:43:34 <etoews> if you're discussing a session, please just share a link to that session to avoid ambiguity. :)
21:44:09 <ttx> #topic Open discussion & announcements
21:44:09 <barrett> #link: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/Product_Work_Group_Vancouver_Work_Session
21:44:13 <ttx> Anything else, anyone ?
21:44:46 <barrett> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/ProductWG_xProjectSession
21:46:18 <bknudson> next tuesday is cross-project tuesday
21:47:54 <jokke_> :)
21:48:04 <ttx> yep, no meeting enxt week obviously
21:48:19 <ttx> Alright, if nothing else, let's close this
21:48:25 <ttx> #endmeeting