Open Stack

On 08/01/16 21:15, Sean Dague wrote:
> On 01/07/2016 06:21 PM, Lana Brindley wrote:
>>
>>> On 7 Jan 2016, at 2:09 AM, Sean Dague <sean at dague.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 01/06/2016 09:02 AM, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
>>>> On 2016-01-06 07:52:48 -0500 (-0500), Sean Dague wrote:
>>>> [...]
>>>>> I think auto openning against a project, and shuffling it to
>>>>> manuals manually (with details added by humans) would be fine.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's not clear to me why a new job was required for that.
>>>>
>>>> The new check job was simply a requirement of the Docs team, since
>>>> they were having trouble triaging auto-generated bugs they were
>>>> receiving and wanted to enforce the inclusion of some expository
>>>> metadata.
>>>
>>> Sure, but if that triage is put back on the Nova team, that seems fine.
>>
>> So you’re thinking we should make all docimpact bugs go to the project bug queue? Even for defcore?
>
> Yes, because then it would be the responsibility of the project team to
> ensure there is enough info before passing it onto the docs team.
>>
>>>
>>> It also doesn't make sense to me there would be a DocImpact change that
>>> wouldn't also have a reno section. The reason someone thinks that a
>>> change needs reflection in the manual is that it adds/removes/changes a
>>> feature that would also show up in release notes. Perhaps my imagination
>>> isn't sufficient to come up with a scenario where DocImpact is valid,
>>> but we wouldn't have content in one of those sections.
>>
>> I can think of plenty. What about where a command is changed slightly? Or an output is formatted differently? Or where flags have been removed, or default values changed, or ….
>
> Nearly all of those changes have been triggering release notes at this
> point. They are all changes the user needs to adapt to because they
> potentially impact compatibility.

Would love it to be the case, but I don't think that's correct. Or if 
it's supposed to be correct, it hasn't been well communicated :)

Few random reviews from the DocImpact queue that didn't have relnotes:

https://review.openstack.org/#/c/180202/
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/249814/
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/250818/
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/230983/

Didn't really look closely into these - would encourage someone with a 
bit more time to do so, but the fact that these were so trivial to eke 
out means that "nearly all" is almost certainly a bad assumption.


>>
>> Bugs and relnotes are two very different things.
>>
>> L
>>
>> Lana Brindley
>> writer:speaker:blogger
>> http://lanabrindley.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> __________________________________________________________________________
>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>
>
>