[ovirt-users] [DISCUSSION] oVirt Weekly Sync Goals and Future.

[Yedidyah Bar David]

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Brian Proffitt" <bproffit at redhat.com>
> To: users at 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 at redhat.com>
> > To: users at 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 at ovirt.org
> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
> 

-- 
Didi