Open Stack

On 09/16/2013 11:50 PM, Anne Gentle wrote:
> Hi all, 
> 
> Great questions Andreas. Here's my thinking.
> 
> Based on https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Releases, we support 2 releases
> at any given time. Right now that's Grizzly and Folsom. On Oct. 17th
> that'll be Grizzly and Havana. So for "continuous release" documents,
> ensure that Grizzly and Havana are covered.
> 
> 
> On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 2:39 PM, Andreas Jaeger <aj at suse.com
> <mailto:aj at suse.com>> wrote:
> 
>     If we publish a book continously, which releases should it cover?
> 
>     Two examples triggered this question:
>     In https://review.openstack.org/#/c/46626/ I've added a note that a
>     section is not relevant with Havana anymore - but relevant with older
>     releases.
> 
> 
> I'll comment on the review as well but I think we should cover Grizzly
> and Havana in the master branch right now. Thing is, people can still
> get to Grizzly docs for admin guides, so they'll have Grizzly guidance.
> So it's also possible we should only document Havana right now. 
>  
> 
>     Looking at https://bugs.launchpad.net/openstack-manuals/+bug/1205060, we
>     now have a couple of variables moved from [DEFAULT] to [database] with
>     the Havana release. How should this be documented? 
> 
>     Should we just document in both cases Havana - or do we take care of
>     documenting both releases? And for which books does this apply?
> 
> 
> Yeah I've been eyeing that bug sideways for a while now. I think we have
> to document Havana and let the Grizzly docs cover the "old" case. What
> do you think?

For the install-guides etc. I agree.

But looking at docs.openstack.org/grizzly , we have guides that point to
master. So, the HA Guide only exists in a single version, there's no
specific grizzly version. And that's what I understand with continously
publishing.

So, how to cover the "old" case?

>  
> 
>     For the books we branch off (Install Guides, Configuration Reference),
>     we should only document Havana - the rest is the question where I feel
>     unsure on policy,
> 
> 
> I've been having a small debate on whether to create a new "continuously
> published" repo and never branch it. What do you think?

Isn't that what we do with HA guide etc? Yes, we branch it since we
branch the whole repo. IMHO let's first figure out the policy and then
the technical side.

> Thanks for asking these questions, helps me think clearly.

I've created an etherpad and have added some further information and
questions to it:

https://etherpad.openstack.org/Continous_Publishing

Hope this helps,
Andreas
-- 
 Andreas Jaeger aj@{suse.com,opensuse.org} Twitter/Identica: jaegerandi
  SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
   GF: Jeff Hawn,Jennifer Guild,Felix Imendörffer,HRB16746 (AG Nürnberg)
    GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F  FED1 389A 563C C272 A126