[tc][docs] missing documentation
Hi, With this mail I want to raise multiple topics towards TC, related to Documentation (SIG): * This week I had the task in the Release Management Team to notify the Documentation (Technical Writing) SIG to apply their processes to create the new release series landing pages for docs.openstack.org. Currently the SIG is chaired by Stephen Finucane, but he won't be around in the next cycle so the Technical Writing SIG will remain without a chair and active members. * Another point that came up is that a lot of projects are missing documentation in Victoria and Wallaby releases as they don't even have a single patch merged on their stable/victoria or stable/wallaby branches, not even the auto-generated patches (showing the lack of stable maintainers of the given projects). For example compare Ussuri [1] and Wallaby [2] projects page. - one proposed solution for this is to auto-merge the auto-generated patches (but on the other hand this does not solve the issue of lacking active maintainers) Thanks, Előd [1] https://docs.openstack.org/ussuri/projects.html [2] https://docs.openstack.org/wallaby/projects.html
On 2021-10-01 17:52:51 +0200 (+0200), Előd Illés wrote: [...]
the lack of stable maintainers of the given projects [...]
I believe that's what https://review.opendev.org/810721 is attempting to solve, but could use more reviews. -- Jeremy Stanley
On 2021-10-01 17:52:51 +0200 (+0200), Előd Illés wrote: [...]
the lack of stable maintainers of the given projects [...]
I believe that's what https://review.opendev.org/810721 is attempting to solve, but could use more reviews. Partly, as my experience (or maybe just feeling?) is that those projects
Előd On 2021. 10. 01. 18:01, Jeremy Stanley wrote: that does not even merge the bot proposed stable patches usually have reviewing problems on master branches as well.
QQ - do you have a listing of missing projects handy? or better yet: some script to list those - that could help TC in deriving project health criteria. -yoctozepto On Fri, 1 Oct 2021 at 19:42, Előd Illés <elod.illes@est.tech> wrote:
Előd
On 2021-10-01 17:52:51 +0200 (+0200), Előd Illés wrote: [...]
the lack of stable maintainers of the given projects [...]
I believe that's what https://review.opendev.org/810721 is attempting to solve, but could use more reviews. Partly, as my experience (or maybe just feeling?) is that those projects
On 2021. 10. 01. 18:01, Jeremy Stanley wrote: that does not even merge the bot proposed stable patches usually have reviewing problems on master branches as well.
---- On Fri, 01 Oct 2021 10:52:51 -0500 Előd Illés <elod.illes@est.tech> wrote ----
Hi,
With this mail I want to raise multiple topics towards TC, related to Documentation (SIG):
* This week I had the task in the Release Management Team to notify the Documentation (Technical Writing) SIG to apply their processes to create the new release series landing pages for docs.openstack.org. Currently the SIG is chaired by Stephen Finucane, but he won't be around in the next cycle so the Technical Writing SIG will remain without a chair and active members.
* Another point that came up is that a lot of projects are missing documentation in Victoria and Wallaby releases as they don't even have a single patch merged on their stable/victoria or stable/wallaby branches, not even the auto-generated patches (showing the lack of stable maintainers of the given projects). For example compare Ussuri [1] and Wallaby [2] projects page. - one proposed solution for this is to auto-merge the auto-generated patches (but on the other hand this does not solve the issue of lacking active maintainers)
Thanks, Elod, for raising the issue. This is very helpful for TC to analyze the project status. To solve it now, I agree with your proposal to auto-merge the auto-generated patches and have their documentation fixed for stable branches. And to solve the stable branch maintainer, we are in-progress to change the stable branch team structure[1]. The current proposal is along with global stable maintainer team as an advisory body and allows the project team to have/manage their stable branch team as they do for the master branch, and that team can handle/manage their stable branch activities/members. I will try to get more attention from TC on this and merge it soon. On Documentation SIG chair, we appreciate Stephen's work and taking care of it. I am adding it in the next meeting agenda also we will discuss the plan in PTG. [1] https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/810721/ -gmann
Thanks,
Előd
[1] https://docs.openstack.org/ussuri/projects.html [2] https://docs.openstack.org/wallaby/projects.html
How does the Projects page get populated? On Fri, Oct 1, 2021 at 11:56 AM Előd Illés <elod.illes@est.tech> wrote:
Hi,
With this mail I want to raise multiple topics towards TC, related to Documentation (SIG):
* This week I had the task in the Release Management Team to notify the Documentation (Technical Writing) SIG to apply their processes to create the new release series landing pages for docs.openstack.org. Currently the SIG is chaired by Stephen Finucane, but he won't be around in the next cycle so the Technical Writing SIG will remain without a chair and active members.
* Another point that came up is that a lot of projects are missing documentation in Victoria and Wallaby releases as they don't even have a single patch merged on their stable/victoria or stable/wallaby branches, not even the auto-generated patches (showing the lack of stable maintainers of the given projects). For example compare Ussuri [1] and Wallaby [2] projects page. - one proposed solution for this is to auto-merge the auto-generated patches (but on the other hand this does not solve the issue of lacking active maintainers)
Thanks,
Előd
[1] https://docs.openstack.org/ussuri/projects.html [2] https://docs.openstack.org/wallaby/projects.html
participants (5)
-
Előd Illés
-
Ghanshyam Mann
-
Jeremy Stanley
-
Peter Matulis
-
Radosław Piliszek