Now that the Storage SIG has been (mostly) ratified, I wanted to start looking forward. We are already started on some of the simple first steps; so giving a little time to have a few tasks under our belt (and give people a chance to wrap their head around the tasks ahead) we're aiming for the first SIG meeting to be on:
04-Apr @ 15:00 UTC.
Anyone who is interested in attending please let me know before then and I'll make sure you're added to the invite. Our current plan is to just keep it simple w/ a Google Hangout (not on-air) so if we grow beyond 10 we'll need to know beforehand.
In this meeting we'll be discussing the following:
* Infrastructure plans (repositories, lists, etc) * Form & Function (who does what, how repos are handled) * Rough roadmap (what to accomplish when) * Identify potential additions to SIG (have Ceph&Gluster, anyone else?) * Any other ideas/questions that may come up
If you have any questions in the meantime feel free to reply here, or hit me directly via email (patrick@inktank.com) or on IRC (scuttlemonkey). Thanks.
Best Regards,
Patrick McGarry Director, Community || Inktank http://ceph.com || http://inktank.com @scuttlemonkey || @ceph || @inktank
On 03/20/2014 09:05 PM, Patrick McGarry wrote:
Now that the Storage SIG has been (mostly) ratified, I wanted to start looking forward. We are already started on some of the simple first steps; so giving a little time to have a few tasks under our belt (and give people a chance to wrap their head around the tasks ahead) we're aiming for the first SIG meeting to be on:
04-Apr @ 15:00 UTC.
Anyone who is interested in attending please let me know before then and I'll make sure you're added to the invite. Our current plan is to just keep it simple w/ a Google Hangout (not on-air) so if we grow beyond 10 we'll need to know beforehand.
In this meeting we'll be discussing the following:
- Infrastructure plans (repositories, lists, etc)
- Form & Function (who does what, how repos are handled)
- Rough roadmap (what to accomplish when)
- Identify potential additions to SIG (have Ceph&Gluster, anyone else?)
- Any other ideas/questions that may come up
In case anyone is looking for the proposal page for the Storage SIG, here it is [1]
[1] http://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/Storage/Proposal
If you have any questions in the meantime feel free to reply here, or hit me directly via email (patrick@inktank.com) or on IRC (scuttlemonkey). Thanks.
Best Regards,
Patrick McGarry Director, Community || Inktank http://ceph.com || http://inktank.com @scuttlemonkey || @ceph || @inktank _______________________________________________ CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On 03/20/2014 08:35 AM, Patrick McGarry wrote:
Our current plan is to just keep it simple w/ a Google Hangout (not on-air) so if we grow beyond 10 we'll need to know beforehand.
While I love me some video conferencing, I just wanted to provide the warnings and caveats.
Similar to the idea of keeping discussions on centos-devel for now, having meetings on a low-barrier medium such as IRC has many benefits that continue to outweigh the downsides.[0]
I totally get the value of seeing each other in meeting, but it's not a great way to keep the community involved. (Video has high bandwidth requirements, is hard to translate, harder to understand speakers esp. if not a native English speaker, etc.) I'll be advocating at the Board level that we at least include IRC-only meetings as part of our open public meeting roadmap.
Could it work to have an initial "social meetup" to get to know each other a bit via video, then have the real discussion/decision work on IRC?
If we're feeling like #centos-devel is too crowded or this is OT, we can use a #centos-meeting channel. Regardless, using centbot is a key tool.
I'd be happy to attend the meeting if I can and help facilitate the IRC usage and meetbot, if that helps. I know other CentOS folks have meetbot and IRC-meeting-moderator experience as well.
- - Karsten
[0] Long version of this topic ...
The trick about the open source way and radical transparency is that it is a PITA. You have to drop a bit of convenience of the 'doers' in order to keep things highly visible to the 'watchers', partly so some of them can and desire to become doers.
http://www.theopensourceway.org/wiki/Stuff_everyone_knows_and_forgets_anyway...
Open discussion before decisions done in a low-barrier medium (text-based, asynchronous) is also key to getting understanding and buy-in from everyone. The reasoning behind each decision is in the public record, so it's easier for people to understand a design decision during and after it's decided.
http://www.theopensourceway.org/wiki/Stuff_everyone_knows_and_forgets_anyway...
(Also,
defaulting to open means that the work to be transparent is built-in to what you are doing already, e.g. using meetbot, so you get all the artifacts and don't have to spend time later explaining over-and-over a decision made in a hallway by two people.)
- -- Karsten 'quaid' Wade .^\ CentOS Doer of Stuff http://TheOpenSourceWay.org \ http://community.redhat.com @quaid (identi.ca/twitter/IRC) \v' gpg: AD0E0C41
Il 20/03/2014 19:27, Karsten Wade ha scritto:
Similar to the idea of keeping discussions on centos-devel for now, having meetings on a low-barrier medium such as IRC has many benefits that continue to outweigh the downsides.[0]
<snip>
I totally get the value of seeing each other in meeting, but it's not a great way to keep the community involved. (Video has high bandwidth requirements, is hard to translate, harder to understand speakers esp. if not a native English speaker, etc.) I'll be advocating at the Board
Like "not a native English speaker" I agree totally with this.
The trick about the open source way and radical transparency is that it is a PITA. You have to drop a bit of convenience of the 'doers' in order to keep things highly visible to the 'watchers', partly so some of them can and desire to become doers.
http://www.theopensourceway.org/wiki/Stuff_everyone_knows_and_forgets_anyway...
Thanks Karsten, a lot of cool stuff and advice about community in this wiki! I'll read all. Alessio
On 20.03.2014 18:27, Karsten Wade wrote:
Similar to the idea of keeping discussions on centos-devel for now, having meetings on a low-barrier medium such as IRC has many benefits that continue to outweigh the downsides.[0]
Sorry for extending the offtopic, but +1000 (cum laude!) for the IRC proposal.
I have found many of the Hangout recordings quite frustrating to watch, partially because of the language barrier, the quality of sound and other interruptions (just when it gets more interesting someone mic gets wacky or someone needs to go etc). It also forces me to watch for a long time as I don't know where the bits that interests me start and so on. I usually end up sleepy or just closing the damn thing and waiting for the tl;dw. And to be honest, sorry to break some hearts, most of you chappies are not too handsome to look at (maybe except Evolution :-D ).
We're all techies, let's keep it text-based.
Lucian
On 04/04/2014 08:20 PM, Nux! wrote:
On 20.03.2014 18:27, Karsten Wade wrote:
Similar to the idea of keeping discussions on centos-devel for now, having meetings on a low-barrier medium such as IRC has many benefits that continue to outweigh the downsides.[0]
Sorry for extending the offtopic, but +1000 (cum laude!) for the IRC proposal.
IRC is right for many reasons, but lets keep in mind that irc has very low velocity.
Yes, I think we'll definitely look into having a periodic IRC meeting as things gain momentum so that we can include a wider swath of the population. For the first couple I wanted the conversation to flow quickly so we could just hash things out and get the basic stuff in place.
For those who still would like to follow along at home I tried to keep a napkin sketch of what was discussed and have it posted on the CentOS wiki:
http://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/Storage/Minutes
If others are interested in becoming more actively involved in the Storage SIG please let me know and I can find the best fit (there is plenty to do!). Mostly I'd love to have experienced package maintainers who would either help newbie RPM builders (like me) get up to speed, or just help establish a procedure that can be largely automated.
We're shooting for a solid CentOS build and installable storage packaging to be established and usable by the end of April. Anyone who wants to help us get there, drop me a line! Thanks.
Best Regards,
Patrick McGarry Director, Community || Inktank http://ceph.com || http://inktank.com @scuttlemonkey || @ceph || @inktank
On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 3:23 PM, Karanbir Singh mail-lists@karan.org wrote:
On 04/04/2014 08:20 PM, Nux! wrote:
On 20.03.2014 18:27, Karsten Wade wrote:
Similar to the idea of keeping discussions on centos-devel for now, having meetings on a low-barrier medium such as IRC has many benefits that continue to outweigh the downsides.[0]
Sorry for extending the offtopic, but +1000 (cum laude!) for the IRC proposal.
IRC is right for many reasons, but lets keep in mind that irc has very low velocity.
-- Karanbir Singh +44-207-0999389 | http://www.karan.org/ | twitter.com/kbsingh GnuPG Key : http://www.karan.org/publickey.asc _______________________________________________ CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
On 04.04.2014 21:35, Patrick McGarry wrote:
For those who still would like to follow along at home I tried to keep a napkin sketch of what was discussed and have it posted on the CentOS wiki:
Cheers for that, pretty impressive to see the Gluster and CEPH projects collaborating so closely. Let's hope for actual results as well. Good job!
Lucian
The meetings starts in another 10 minutes.
On 03/20/2014 09:05 PM, Patrick McGarry wrote:
Now that the Storage SIG has been (mostly) ratified, I wanted to start looking forward. We are already started on some of the simple first steps; so giving a little time to have a few tasks under our belt (and give people a chance to wrap their head around the tasks ahead) we're aiming for the first SIG meeting to be on:
04-Apr @ 15:00 UTC.
Anyone who is interested in attending please let me know before then and I'll make sure you're added to the invite. Our current plan is to just keep it simple w/ a Google Hangout (not on-air) so if we grow beyond 10 we'll need to know beforehand.
In this meeting we'll be discussing the following:
- Infrastructure plans (repositories, lists, etc)
- Form & Function (who does what, how repos are handled)
- Rough roadmap (what to accomplish when)
- Identify potential additions to SIG (have Ceph&Gluster, anyone else?)
- Any other ideas/questions that may come up
If you have any questions in the meantime feel free to reply here, or hit me directly via email (patrick@inktank.com) or on IRC (scuttlemonkey). Thanks.
Best Regards,
Patrick McGarry Director, Community || Inktank http://ceph.com || http://inktank.com @scuttlemonkey || @ceph || @inktank _______________________________________________ CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
-
Alessio Fattorini -
Karanbir Singh -
Karsten Wade -
Lalatendu Mohanty -
Nux! -
Patrick McGarry