----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Proffitt" <bproffit@redhat.com> To: users@ovirt.org Sent: Wednesday, April 8, 2015 6:24:56 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-users] [DISCUSSION] oVirt Weekly Sync Goals and Future.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sandro Bonazzola" <sbonazzo@redhat.com> To: users@ovirt.org Sent: Thursday, April 2, 2015 2:46:42 AM Subject: Re: [ovirt-users] [DISCUSSION] oVirt Weekly Sync Goals and Future.
Il 01/04/2015 17:28, Yaniv Dary ha scritto:
Hi, In my opinion the current format can be replaced by a etherpad update that is sent as a newsletter every week. The current format doesn't add a lot of value to the project work and doesn't create a real sync on the ongoing topics. No decisions are done today there as well.
What do you think should be the goal of the weekly meeting? How can we improve it? Is a newsletter a good enough update?
I think a newsletter can replace the current sync format.
[snip]
Etherpad will unfortunately not work, nor any tool that is available to Red Hat-only community members. Any medium we evaluate has to be publicly available, or it is of little use to the oVirt community.
http://lists.ovirt.org/pipermail/users/2014-April/023399.html :-)
Mailing lists can work, but we have to get around the problem of "missed" threads. The very fact that this thread went answered by just one person in the six days it has been live is evidence that threads on high-traffic mailing lists can get missed. Or consciously ignored. Encouraging people to attend a real-time synchronous meeting with a regular cadence can avoid that problem.
Projects that get larger often split their mailing lists along the way. The real problem will be to split at the right place - to define the role of each list in a way that will make it very clear to people that want to post, what's the best list to use. This isn't easy at all. OTOH, if we have, say, discussion@, and keep the existing users@ and devel@, and someone posts to users@, and I think it should attract people on discussion@, it's much easier to move the discussion there, instead of starting to think who specifically I might want to Cc so that they notice.
I am not set on what the format/structure of such a public meeting should be, but we need to think about:
* What do we want to achieve? * What decisions are we going to make? * What is the role of the attendees? * Who gets what out of the meeting?
One way to conduct such meetings could be the stakeholder/observer model from agile development meetings, otherwise known as "the chicken and the pig" model[1]. This would essentially be a variation of what we do know, with statuses given by stakeholders and questions reserved at the end for observers and participants.But people can at anytime ask to be upgraded to stakeholder status for that meeting.
I think that curating weekly meetings and saying "here are the issues that will be discussed" and keeping those issues interesting could be a way to go. Like "what new features *should* be added to 3.6?" or "how *can* we position/improve ourselves against X?"
Peace, BKP
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Chicken_and_the_Pig
-- Brian Proffitt
Community Liaison oVirt Open Source and Standards, Red Hat - http://community.redhat.com Phone: +1 574 383 9BKP IRC: bkp @ OFTC _______________________________________________ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
-- Didi