settingsLogin | Registersettings

[Openstack-operators] [LCOO] Intro to Large Contributing OpenStack Operators working group

0 votes

Putting this out to the whole User and Operator Community. Jay and Edgar have given us the opportunity to introduce and so we worked up the following. Community feedback ideas and continued collaboration are welcome.

The LCOO is a group of Multi-cloud Operators who are also development contributors (read we have staff who are project members and desire to jointly increase our participation in the project teams). In general we will (just getting started) coordinate with each other and then through the Product Working Group User Story process https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/ProductTeam/User_Stories along with the other WG prepare things for the Project teams.

Beyond the above, at UC suggestion from the Barcelona meetings we agreed to participate in all the working groups where we seem to have good collaboration opportunities. The goal would be to find common user stories and put our joint efforts together. We have attended or at least compared notes with Telco/NFV, Massively Scalable and Enterprise WG and seem to be on good footing as to our common interests and differences. We haven't yet with the LDT. We intend to use the Product Working Group process and the upcoming new Forum and PTG pattern to merge efforts and communicate to the Devs including our own. Here’s a little deeper insight (at least as LCOO sees it into our relationship with the other WG:

  • Telco/NFV - Massively Scalable -LCOO: Jamey McCabe from LCOO has joined the Telco NFV Working Group as has Adrien of Massively Scalable and both are actively participating. Our main objective there is to define a reference architecture for TelCo/NFV and OpenStack. That would be a good input to potential future LCOO activities but not an item we are otherwise pursuing. See and join us at: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/operators_telco_nfv/2017/

  • Large Deployment Team: The LCOO has not managed to connect/support LDT post Barcelona. There was one meeting in December and we missed it. Will be joining the February meeting: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/LDT

  • Product Working Group: LCOO has been actively working with the PWG and seems the PWG has taken "LCOO under their wing" so we can bring our User Stories to the community/projects in an actionable fashion. Andy Ukasick as the LCOO Roadmap (just getting started) lead has been the most active. See and Join us at: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/ProductTeam

Beyond the desire to work with others seeking to increase their upstream dev team: In terms of what kinds of companies initially formed the LCOO, we purposely didn't aim at the Telco Operators space but rather at the "for own internal use but with needs for a multi-cloud" type of operators. This was led largely by AT&T who gave the keynote talk in Austin largely on this subject with the call to action to like minded companies to join together. It went from there. We don’t' have prescriptive rules for who will join LCOO and probably can't and really not looking to group our members that tightly. Anyone who thinks they fit the pattern and looking to join to help drive it along is welcome.

As regarding our toolset though more of a status report about our formation: In the first 4 months of our WG - up until the Barcelona/Ocata Design Summit our goal was to identify commonality so that we could partner at the Summit. We used meetings with Etherpads and e-mail and slack. Now we are moving to a new phase where we hope to distill and publish a common roadmap and user stories to bring to the Queens development cycle. For that purpose we've identified the Atlassian toolset (Confluence and Jira) as promising tools to help us accomplish that upfront process. It's pretty exciting and once we are running well we'll be interested to share if other WG are interested. We are following patterns we see at OPNFV and in OSIC and working to have them feed into and live well with the PWG user story process and OpenStack Infra toolset especially Gerrit. The Atlassian cloud instance was donated to us by Atlassian since we are doing OpenSource work and the instance is open to view by anyone who establishes an Atlassian Cloud account. We are aware it creates another sign on and investigated if it was possible to Federate with the Ubuntu One IdP which serves launchpad but seems that's not easy or likely.

We welcome others who are part of working groups to chime in and let us know what has worked for them and help us. We really appreciate the advice and support we've received so far.

-----Original Message-----
From: Edgar Magana [mailto:edgar.magana@workday.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2017 4:03 PM
To: openstack-operators@lists.openstack.org; user-committee@lists.openstack.org
Cc: MCCABE, JAMEY A jm6819@att.com; UKASICK, ANDREW au3678@att.com
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] Large Contributing OpenStack Operators working group?

Jay,

I am including the WG chairs to make sure they answers your questions and addresses your concerns.
In Barcelona the UC asked exactly the same questions and recommended to the co-chairs of the LCOO WG to work with the existing WG to identify overlapping activities and either to work together or go ahead with the WG if there were not overlapping on goals and deliverables.

I will let the co-chairs to follow up yours questions. BTW. I do not think this topic should be posted in the openstack-dev mailing list. So, I will BCC it.

Andrew and Jamey,

Please, address these questions. Let’s work all together to make sure that we have all groups aligned and coordinated.

Thanks,

Edgar

On 2/2/17, 12:14 PM, "Jay Pipes" jaypipes@gmail.com wrote:

Hi,

I was told about this group today. I have a few questions. Hopefully 
someone from this team can illuminate me with some answers.

1) What is the purpose of this group? The wiki states that the team 
"aims to define the use cases and identify and prioritise the 
requirements which are needed to deploy, manage, and run services on top 
of OpenStack. This work includes identifying functional gaps, creating 
blueprints, submitting and reviewing patches to the relevant OpenStack 
projects, contributing to working those items, tracking their completion."

What is the difference between the LCOO and the following existing 
working groups?

  * Large Deployment Team
  * Massively Distributed Team
  * Product Working Group
  * Telco/NFV Working Group

2) According to the wiki page, only companies that are "Multi-Cloud 
Operator[s] and/or Network Service Provider[s]" are welcome in this 
team. Why is the team called "Large Contributing OpenStack Operators" if 
it's only for Telcos? Further, if this is truly only for Telcos, why 
isn't the Telco/NFV working group appropriate?

3) Under the "Guiding principles" section of the above wiki, the top 
principle is "Align with the OpenStack Foundation". If this is the case, 
why did the group move its content to the closed Atlassian Confuence 
platform? Why does the group have a set of separate Slack channels 
instead of using the OpenStack mailing lists and IRC channels? Why is 
the OPNFV Jira used for tracking work items for the LCOO agenda?

See https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__wiki.openstack.org_wiki_Gluon_Tasks-2DOcata&d=DwICAg&c=DS6PUFBBr_KiLo7Sjt3ljp5jaW5k2i9ijVXllEdOozc&r=G0XRJfDQsuBvqa_wpWyDAUlSpeMV4W1qfWqBfctlWwQ&m=haOSpIhsa6KyDvuhRFigFVTLrTJxJ1Zv3kfm0JwTTtY&s=kntt00JEwpizTxQus4U9FhnwF_7WicJ7oRncGmkYPGc&e=  for examples.

4) I see a lot of agenda items around projects like Gluon, Craton, 
Watcher, and Blazar. I don't see any concrete ideas about talking with 
the developers of the key infrastructure services that OpenStack is 
built around. How does the LCOO plan on reaching out to the developers 
of the long-standing OpenStack projects like Nova, Neutron, Cinder, and 
Keystone to drive their shared agenda?

Thanks for reading and (hopefully) answering.

-jay

__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.openstack.org_cgi-2Dbin_mailman_listinfo_openstack-2Ddev&d=DwICAg&c=DS6PUFBBr_KiLo7Sjt3ljp5jaW5k2i9ijVXllEdOozc&r=G0XRJfDQsuBvqa_wpWyDAUlSpeMV4W1qfWqBfctlWwQ&m=haOSpIhsa6KyDvuhRFigFVTLrTJxJ1Zv3kfm0JwTTtY&s=RzyOgrwm1BfJXW8SdeBdAOpYEAXsisGKWvj_Lk3iEec&e= 


OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
asked Feb 6, 2017 in openstack-operators by MCCABE,_JAMEY_A (240 points)  

1 Response

0 votes

On 2017-02-03 21:50:25 +0000 (+0000), MCCABE, JAMEY A wrote:
[...]
The LCOO is a group of Multi-cloud Operators who are also
development contributors (read we have staff who are project
members and desire to jointly increase our participation in the
project teams).
[...]

It's unclear to me what definition of "operators" is being used
there. As far as I'm aware our other working groups are made up of
individuals, not organizations, so are the individual members of
this group systems administrators who also write features and fixes
for the upstream OpenStack software as developers? Or are you saying
that you're sysadmins who have the ear of some particular upstream
developers? Or is it that you're mostly in nontechnical roles but
have close relationships with some sysadmins and upstream
developers?

I'm interpreting it as the last one, but just want to be clear as to
the balance you're striking between direct involvement (implementing
what you need yourself) and indirection (compelling others, perhaps
in your employ, to implement what you need). The difference may seem
subtle, but it can have a significant impact on the amount of
influence you'll manifest or the degree to which your efforts might
be met with indifference and perhaps even resistance. Many coming
from large corporate environments are used to "top-down"
organization, while free software is very much a "bottom-up"
environment where those doing the work to implement fixes and new
features hold most of the community influence and are the ones who
ultimately need convincing.

We don’t' have prescriptive rules for who will join LCOO and
probably can't and really not looking to group our members that
tightly. Anyone who thinks they fit the pattern and looking to
join to help drive it along is welcome.
[...]

That's reassuring. https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/LCOO#How_to_Join
is a bit hard to follow as, again, it seems to conflate people with
organizations. It implies that the individuals who make up the
working group are systems administrators and contributors to our
software, but then it says "with at least 4 FTEs" so are these FTEs
the actual working group members? Or someone "representing" those
engineers participates in working group meetings on their behalf?
In its current state, the document is also far more restrictive
about who is allowed to join than your comment above would seem to
indicate. Maybe it could use a bit of rewording.

Under the Governance section, it even uses the phrase "member
companies" which is a concept I find strange and confusing in such
context. Companies are made up of individual people, and it's these
people who should be involved and accountable for their own opinions
and actions within the scope of a working group.

we've identified the Atlassian toolset (Confluence and
Jira) as promising tools to help us accomplish that upfront
process. It's pretty exciting and once we are running well we'll
be interested to share if other WG are interested. We are
following patterns we see at OPNFV and in OSIC
[...]

I'll refrain from restating the usual "free software needs free
tools" ideology here, but if you want to provide feedback to the
OpenStack community as to what the shortcomings were with the
available free tools we use it would be much appreciated. I also
find it interesting that you looked to OPNFV and OSIC instead of
OpenStack for patterns to follow; so again if you have any details
as to what was lacking in our community workflows and governance,
that might help us understand where to focus on improving so we can
better serve your needs in the future.
--
Jeremy Stanley


OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

responded Feb 6, 2017 by Jeremy_Stanley (56,700 points)   3 5 7
...