Open Stack

Also, apologies, if consolidation or reorganizing all these is reasonable,
what do you think that would look like; i.e.

osops
> tools
>> contrib
>> generic
>> monitoring
>> logging
> docs
> example-configs


On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 10:26 PM, Melvin Hillsman <mrhillsman at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Great to see this moving. I have some questions/concerns based on your
> statement Doug about docs.openstack.org publishing and do not want to
> detour the conversation but ask for feedback. Currently there are a number
> of repositories under osops-
>
> https://github.com/openstack-infra/project-config/blob/
> master/gerrit/projects.yaml#L5673-L5703
>
> Generally active:
> osops-tools-contrib
> osops-tools-generic
> osops-tools-monitoring
>
>
> Probably dead:
> osops-tools-logging
> osops-coda
> osops-example-configs
>
> Because you are more familiar with how things work, is there a way to
> consolidate these vs coming up with another repo like osops-docs or
> whatever in this case? And second, is there already governance clearance to
> publish based on the following - https://launchpad.net/osops - which is
> where these repos originated.
>
>
> On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 9:56 PM, Frank Kloeker <eumel at arcor.de> wrote:
>
>> Hi Chris,
>>
>> thanks for summarize our session today in Vancouver. As I18n PTL and one
>> of the Docs Core I put Petr in Cc. He is currently Docs PTL, but
>> unfortunatelly not on-site.
>> I couldn't also not get the full history of the story and that's also not
>> the idea to starting finger pointing. As usualy we moving forward and there
>> are some interesting things to know what happened.
>> First of all: There are no "Docs-Team" anymore. If you look at [1] there
>> are mostly part-time contributors like me or people are more involved in
>> other projects and therefore busy. Because of that, the responsibility of
>> documentation content are moved completely to the project teams. Each repo
>> has a user guide, admin guide, deployment guide, and so on. The small
>> Documentation Team provides only tooling and give advices how to write and
>> publish a document. So it's up to you to re-use the old repo on [2] or
>> setup a new one. I would recommend to use the best of both worlds. There
>> are a very good toolset in place for testing and publishing documents.
>> There are also various text editors for rst extensions available, like in
>> vim, notepad++ or also online services. I understand the concerns and when
>> people are sad because their patches are ignored for months. But it's
>> alltime a question of responsibilty and how can spend people time.
>> I would be available for help. As I18n PTL I could imagine that a
>> OpenStack Operations Guide is available in different languages and portable
>> in different formats like in Sphinx. For us as translation team it's a good
>> possibility to get feedback about the quality and to understand the
>> requirements, also for other documents.
>> So let's move on.
>>
>> kind regards
>>
>> Frank
>>
>> [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/admin/groups/30,members
>> [2] https://github.com/openstack/operations-guide
>>
>>
>> Am 2018-05-24 03:38, schrieb Chris Morgan:
>>
>>> Hello Everyone,
>>>
>>> In the Ops Community documentation working session today in Vancouver,
>>> we made some really good progress (etherpad here:
>>> https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/YVR-Ops-Community-Docs but not all of
>>> the good stuff is yet written down).
>>>
>>> In short, we're going to course correct on maintaining the Operators
>>> Guide, the HA Guide and Architecture Guide, not edit-in-place via the
>>> wiki and instead try still maintaining them as code, but with a
>>> different, new set of owners, possibly in a new Ops-focused repo.
>>> There was a strong consensus that a) code workflow >> wiki workflow
>>> and that b) openstack core docs tools are just fine.
>>>
>>> There is a lot still to be decided on how where and when, but we do
>>> have an offer of a rewrite of the HA Guide, as long as the changes
>>> will be allowed to actually land, so we expect to actually start
>>> showing some progress.
>>>
>>> At the end of the session, people wanted to know how to follow along
>>> as various people work out how to do this... and so for now that place
>>> is this very email thread. The idea is if the code for those documents
>>> goes to live in a different repo, or if new contributors turn up, or
>>> if a new version we will announce/discuss it here until such time as
>>> we have a better home for this initiative.
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>>
>>> Chris
>>>
>>> --
>>> Chris Morgan <mihalis68 at gmail.com>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> OpenStack-operators mailing list
>>> OpenStack-operators at lists.openstack.org
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> OpenStack-operators mailing list
>> OpenStack-operators at lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Kind regards,
>
> Melvin Hillsman
> mrhillsman at gmail.com
> mobile: (832) 264-2646
>



-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
mrhillsman at gmail.com
mobile: (832) 264-2646
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-operators/attachments/20180523/e77a9b55/attachment.html>