[RFC] CUDCon - Cloud conference to parallel FUDCon
rbergero at redhat.com
Mon Aug 22 23:26:03 UTC 2011
All of that said below (top-posting for those who fell asleep) - is
anyone on-list available to do even a Cloud track at FUDCon in Milan?
Particularly looking at folks from/repping for/presenting on Aeolus,
HekaFS, Cloudstack, Openstack, Eucalyptus.
Sept. 30 - Oct. 2.
On 08/22/2011 04:04 PM, Robyn Bergeron wrote:
> On 08/22/2011 03:25 PM, Karsten Wade wrote:
>> I'll likely end up answering stuff a few times, but that's OK.
>> Part of this is that I had two ideas at the same time - one to do an
>> open source conference, the other to call it CUDCon. Clearly it's an
>> evolving beast. Onward with replies ...
>> On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 01:46:51PM -0700, Robyn Bergeron wrote:
>>> So my gut feelings on this:
>>> * Having this at the *same time* as FUDCon would be less than optimal,
>>> as we've seen in the past with having FUDCon co-lo'd with JUDCon or
>>> Summit, or even FUDCon at the same time as other events (fosdem, etc.).
>>> People have to choose from one or the other, and can't make the most of
>>> their time at either event. Even FADs run on the same days as
>>> $variousconferences wind up having people come in and out and not be
>>> able to get anything done.
>>> * Having it before/after puts a lot of folks in the position of having
>>> to take off a full week from work, or else having to choose one or the
>> So perhaps my thinking on this is a few years out of date, considering
>> the alignment of thinking that says, "No, duh!"
>> The thinking is, bring in a *new* set of people who wouldn't be at
> I understand that. My thinking is, that those people won't want to
> come to a place where they're feeling like they're going to have
> Fedora constantly being "advertised."
>> Don't put up a competing track, merge. All the Fedora-focused cloud
>> talks end up being done "within" CUDCon. Think of it, if you will, as
>> a tag saying, "This talk is interesting to Fedora& cloud," i.e., more
>> than one audience.
> Yes, but all of the non-Fedora cloud stuff winds up being in that
> track as well, and it becomes something that a bunch of us have to
> choose from. And it's the folks who have been busting ass to make
> Cloud actually successful in Fedora - we're the ones who wind up
> getting the most screwed. Because we care about Fedora, and we care
> about Cloud. It's one thing to have a day-long track - it's entirely
> something different to expand it to something large where we're
> obligated to essentially be at one event or another.
>>> * I fear that despite having it under "different branding" - even having
>>> it at the same time as a Red Hat-sponsored "event" will give it the
>>> illusion that it's going to be very Red Hat-focused - possibly
>>> disenfranchising other folks from coming.
>> I'll be honest, I think (as with the original FUDCon), the CUDCon as a
>> brand is good enough it is worth doing battle with the "Yet another
>> *UDCon from Red Hat."
>> But as I said at the start, and is clear in the response, there are 3
>> points here.
>> 1. Is it useful to have an open source cloud conference?
>> 2. Can it be called CUDCon or does it need a more neutral name? But
>> what about the humor value? (CUDSummit.org is available, too, but
>> loses the -con air.)
> While I think it's cute, I think a more neutral name and more neutral
> venue would make it more neutral.
>> 3. Should it be paired with FUDCon?
>> Bigger conferences pair stuff all the time and it works. I'm just
>> wondering if CUDCon is the thing that grows FUDCon to be bigger-er so
>> it doesn't suffer from the brain-drainage problem.
> Yes, bigger conferences pair stuff all the time. But it's usually the
> "vendor-neutral" conference that is the main event, and "branded"
> parts of that may run before or after. Take KVM Forum and Linuxcon for
> example - obviously LinuxCon was the main event, and KVM Forum was an
> add on. But they weren't simultaneous, people weren't forced to
> choose - they went early, and stayed later. Same goes for things like
> Build a Cloud Day preceding events like SCALE, OLF, etc.
> I don't want FUDCon or CUDCon to be the solution to "fix" the other
> problem. They should both be able to stand on their own as viable
> events. As it is, people are *fully booked* when they come to FUDCon
> with things they already have to solve/hack on. I would say at least a
> good half of the people active on this list and in meetings, myself
> included, don't do the Cloud SIG as part of "their job" - it's purely
> volunteer. And there are other folks for whom Cloud is their primary
> job, and maybe even "Cloud in Fedora" is part of their job, but are
> far more active in Fedora than just that angle - gholms and ke4qqq are
> the primary examples here. For people like us, and I don't want this
> to come off as 'all about me' since we all know my actual technical
> contribution is really really low ;) - our ability to effectively
> participate in both parts of the conference is basically shot.
>>> I really like the idea of having a Cloud Developer/End user-focused
>>> event, giving devs the opportunity to work amongst each other and find
>>> common ground, ways to work together, and getting to hear about the gaps
>>> that end-users are experiencing -- but I feel like having it be more
>>> independent, and getting some key folks in from other communities to
>>> help drive it and put it together, would make it much more
>> OK, let's keep that as a very serious option, that I just take this to
>> a stand-alone, new plan and discussion, then start pulling people in
>> from various related communities.
>>> We did have what was more or less a "full track," so to speak, of
>>> cloud-stuff at FUDCon this year, and that worked very well, even though
>>> it was somewhat Fedora-focused.
>>> My other major concern is "what happens if it's super successful" (oh
>>> noes!) - how do we manage that with the limited Fedora budget that we
>>> have, or where are we getting money to sponsor what could potentially be
>>> another 100 folks showing up - as far as a "fudpub option", having
>>> enough rooms at a hotel at a point when FUDCon itself has blocked off
>>> only enough rooms for a Fedora audience, etc.
>> I'm using this open thinking process to bake a plan I'll be presenting
>> to platform and cloud product and marketing folks at Red Hat for
>> funding -- regardless of FUDCon connection. Do I think the FUDCon
>> connection makes it an easier or harder sell for those folks? Not sure
>> yet ...
>> So my go-plan for Milan is to scrape by with what I can find for
>> funding (very little) but prove the model, and use that to justify
>> actual budget for Blacksburg from $sponsors. Naturally, I'd start
>> looking for sponsorship first at home ...
>>> Generally, I think it would be far better off as an independent event,
>>> particularly if we want it to be an Independent Event - we can't say
>>> that we want it to be for everyone and that it's not Fedora-focused, but
>>> still want to leverage the fact that Fedora is onsite. I really feel
>>> like it's one or the other, but doing both I think causes a big
>>> distraction for FUDCon itself, and ties itself in a way to Red Hat
>>> branding that really makes it not independent, no matter how much we say
>>> otherwise. Even calling itself an *UDCon is essentially reusing names
>>> that are given to other Red Hat conferences, which I suspect probably
>>> would just give people the impression that it's going to be very RHT
>>> Sorry to be all Negative-Nancy. Like I said, I like the idea - but I
>>> don't want the idea, or FUDCon, to suffer - I think it could be very
>>> successful as something that is more independent, both in terms of
>>> attendees and output done.
>> You'll note in the proposal that one of the values of connecting with
>> a FUDCon is the chance to interrelate with the very developers who
>> work on both important upstreams and important integration points
>> (Fedora and RHEL/EPEL.) That's a value and focus to start.
>> I'm feeling like that is something I *can* deliver on by pairing with
>> I can't deliver that equivalent value without pairing an open source
>> cloud conference with another conference.
> Do we really need that value? Is the value of having 10+ Big Name open
> source cloud projects not enough?
> If anything, I'd argue that the most value would NOT be in the OS
> layer - the most value would be in synchronizing with virtualization
> projects, and with other management pieces (Puppet, Chef, Zenoss,
> etc.). For the most part, the cloud stuff out there is abstracted away
> from having a direct relationship with the OS folks by virtue of the
> fact that most of it is used to orchestrate virtualization bits. Even
> if we did try and deliver that value via FUDCon, most cloud folks are
> in the know enough to know that the only people present are going to
> be Fedora/RHEL and KVM-focused, and unless we get folks from Ubuntu
> and Suse and Microsoft and Xen and VMware to show up, the "value"
> isn't going to be very comprehensive for them to be compelling.
>> I see there is enough there-there to bring together some of the open
>> source cloud efforts to a conference, but what brings out the kernel
>> and packaging and release engineering folks from the various Linux
>> If we can get a conference that *starts* alongside FUDCon, there is no
>> reason it can't run alongside other distro-specific conferences.
>> And that brings us back around to the saw's edge that I think FUDCon
>> is at. It doesn't have to grow in size, but if it is going to, one way
>> is to figure out how to embrace the shared communities of interest.
>> Anyway, I'm not stuck on any idea other than the same one we all agree
>> needs doing, 'neutral-ground open source cloud conference'. Well, I'm
>> a bit stuck in not taking ourselves too seriously, which is why I want
>> to be all clever with the CUDonyms.
>> - Karsten
>> cloud mailing list
>> cloud at lists.fedoraproject.org
> cloud mailing list
> cloud at lists.fedoraproject.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the cloud