Open Stack

On Fri, Aug 30 2013, Russell Bryant wrote:

> This is something we could get better at across all of OpenStack.
>
> I've been thinking about proposing requiring docs *somewhere* for
> everything that affects docs.  For small stuff, it could be explaining
> it especially well in the commit message.  For larger stuff, it could
> be covered on the blueprint or wiki page.
>
> I think at the least, we could provide some of the core information so
> that the docs team is left with figuring out where best to fit it into
> the existing guides, as opposed to generating the content from scratch.

I was discussing the subject with Anne on IRC. Ceilometer doesn't have
any documentation stored in any external repository (yet). My point of
view is that it's better to systematically block patches not updating
the documentation, than to use DocImpact and cross fingers. That clearly
didn't work for us so far.

I'll try to check about how we can integrate with the existing
documentation provided by other core projects (such as API references
etc) while keeping the documentation in the repository.

Any hint appreciated obviously. :)

-- 
Julien Danjou
;; Free Software hacker ; independent consultant
;; http://julien.danjou.info
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 835 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20130830/e2dcd84a/attachment.pgp>