Open Stack

Andreas, Lana, Matt,

I appreciate your understanding and accommodating my request. I sincerely believe that having the documentation for Mitaka will be a significant benefit. 

I realize that with this option we may have to re-work all of this in Newton subject to the outcome of the discussion(s) in Austin and your proposal for moving forward.

Thank you so much,

-amrith

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andreas Jaeger [mailto:aj at suse.com]
> Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2016 3:12 AM
> To: Lana Brindley <openstack at lanabrindley.com>; openstack-
> docs at lists.openstack.org; Amrith Kumar <amrith at tesora.com>
> Subject: Re: [OpenStack-docs] [openstack-dev] [docs] Our Install Guides
> Only Cover Defcore - What about big tent?
> 
> On 2016-04-14 08:26, Lana Brindley wrote:
> > On 14/04/16 04:32, Andreas Jaeger wrote:
> >> On 04/13/2016 08:01 PM, Amrith Kumar wrote:
> >>> Andreas,
> >>>
> >>> Thanks for your email. I am aware of the reviews you describe below
> but I was still under the impression that the status from the email on
> openstack-docs (Mitaka Install Guide testing) [1] and [2] were still
> valid.
> >>>
> >>> The understanding I had from those email threads is that the door
> hadn't yet closed. But I'll defer to the doc team; I think you understand
> the motivation for my request, and I respect (and fully admit that I don't
> understand) the complexities involved in releasing documentation.
> >
> > Sorry for the confusion on this one, it's my fault as I've been giving
> some mixed messages.
> >
> > We didn't approve the spec late in March[1], simply because it was too
> late to propose large scale changes while we were in the throes of testing
> the Install Guide.
> >
> > What then happened was that the changes were proposed anyway[2], and we
> (predictably, given that we hadn't approved the spec) blocked them.
> However, Matt (who was doing the bulk of the testing) mentioned on the
> mailing list that they could potentially be merged, as they were "a
> relatively simple/optional service and the patch in the review queue looks
> fairly complete"[3]. So I definitely dropped a ball in not going back and
> working out whether or not to merge it. However, even if it had been
> merged, it still would have remained untested, which was the reason we
> declined the spec and the patch in the first place.
> >
> > Because we don't branch the Install Guide until some weeks after the
> release date (this is so that we can complete testing against final
> packages, rather than rely on pre-release packages), I think it's feasible
> to have this go in to the Kilo release at this stage. However, it will be
> untested against Kilo (and will require a note stating that) and, as
> Andreas noted, with large scale changes to the Install Guide looming for
> Newton, could be completely redesigned or removed in the next release.
> 
> Kilo -> Mitaka I guess
> 
> > If you're happy with that solution, and Andreas and Matt agree, I
> support having that patch merge any time (Andreas' option #2).
> 
> I'm fine with it. Matt?
> 
> 
> > Again, I apologise, as I did drop the ball on this and forgot to go back
> and check the patch before release, but thanks for bringing it up, and
> hopefully this will help us sort it out.
> 
> Andreas
> 
> > L
> >
> > 1: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/290053
> > 2: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/298929/
> > 3: http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-docs/2016-
> March/008385.html
> 
> 
> 
> --
>  Andreas Jaeger aj@{suse.com,opensuse.org} Twitter: jaegerandi
>   SUSE LINUX GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
>    GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton,
>        HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
>     GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F FED1 389A 563C C272 A126