Open Stack

On 30 November 2016 at 08:53, Michael Johnson <johnsomor at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Flavio,
>
> These tags don't seem to be rendering/laying out well for octavia:
> https://github.com/openstack/octavia/blob/master/README.rst
>
> Any pointers to get this corrected or is this part of the backend
> rendering work you mentioned in the keystone message above?
>
>
Actually I just noticed that this may break building docs locally for some
envs as I now get in my env:

Warning, treated as error:
README.rst:None: WARNING: nonlocal image URI found:
http://governance.openstack.org/badges/neutron-lib.svg

I was aware of [1], and I am unsure on the next steps. Can some advise?

Thanks,
Armando

[1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/229951/


> Michael
>
> On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 1:34 AM, Flavio Percoco <flavio at redhat.com> wrote:
> > On 25/11/16 13:46 +0000, Amrith Kumar wrote:
> >>
> >> Flavio,
> >>
> >> I see a number of patches[1] which have been landed on this project but
> I
> >> find
> >> that at least the ones that were landed for Trove, and a random sampling
> >> of
> >> the others all to be different from what you proposed below[2] in one
> >> important aspect.
> >>
> >> In [2] you proposed a structure where the title of the document; or the
> >> first,
> >> and most prominent heading, would be the existing heading of the
> document,
> >> and
> >> the tags would be below that. In [2] for example, that was:
> >>
> >> "kombu - Messaging library for Python"
> >>
> >> and the tags would be in smaller font below that.
> >
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > Some fixes landed yesterday to improve the badges layout. For those
> > interested,
> > here's an example of what it looks like now:
> >
> > https://github.com/openstack/keystone
> >
> > Basically, the horizontal padding was reduced to the minimum needed and
> the
> > badges width was set to the total width of the image.
> >
> > Hope this helps,
> > Flavio
> >
> >
> >> What I see in [3] the patch for Trove and the proposed example [4] is:
> >>
> >> "Team and repository tags" as the first, and most conspicuous header,
> and
> >> the
> >> header "Trove" below that.
> >>
> >> In some cases the second header is the same font as the "Team and
> >> repository
> >> tags" header.
> >>
> >> I think this change (these 124 changes) as proposed are not consistent
> >> with
> >> the proposal you made below, and certainly seem to be less suitable than
> >> that
> >> proposal. The end product for the four trove repositories [4], [5], [6],
> >> and
> >> [7]
> >>
> >> I think we should have a discussion on the ML whether we feel that this
> >> new
> >> structure is the appropriate one, and before some projects approve these
> >> changes and others don't that these be all marked WF-1.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> -amrith
> >>
> >> [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/q/topic:project-badges
> >> [2] https://github.com/celery/kombu/blob/master/README.rst
> >> [3] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/402547/
> >> [4] https://gist.github.com/anonymous/4ccf1cc6e531bb50e78cb4d64dfe1065
> >> [5] https://gist.github.com/1f38def1c65c733b7e4cec3d07399e99
> >> [6] https://gist.github.com/2f1c6e9b800db6d4a49d46f5b0623c1d
> >> [7] https://gist.github.com/9e9e2e2ba4ecfdece7827082114f8258
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: Flavio Percoco [mailto:flavio at redhat.com]
> >>> Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2016 7:07 AM
> >>> To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> >>> <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
> >>> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [all][tc] Exposing project team's metadata
> >>> in
> >>> README files
> >>>
> >>> On 12/10/16 11:01 -0400, Doug Hellmann wrote:
> >>> >Excerpts from Flavio Percoco's message of 2016-10-12 14:50:03 +0200:
> >>> >> Greetings,
> >>> >>
> >>> >> One of the common complains about the existing project organization
> >>> >> in the big tent is that it's difficult to wrap our heads around the
> >>> >> many projects there are, their current state (in/out the big tent),
> >>> >> their
> >>> tags, etc.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> This information is available on the governance website[0]. Each
> >>> >> official project team has a page there containing the information
> >>> >> related to the deliverables managed by that team. Unfortunately, I
> >>> >> don't think this page is checked often enough and I believe it's not
> >>> >> known
> >>> by everyone.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> In the hope that we can make this information clearer to people
> >>> >> browsing the many repos (most likely on github), I'd like to propose
> >>> >> that we include the information of each deliverable in the readme
> >>> >> file. This information would be rendered along with the rest of the
> >>> >> readme (at least on Github, which might not be our main repo but
> it's
> >>> >> the
> >>> place most humans go to to check our projects).
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Rather than duplicating this information, I'd like to find a way to
> >>> >> just "include it" in the Readme file. As far as showing the
> >>> >> "official" badge goes, I believe it'd be quite simple. We can do it
> >>> >> the same way CI tags are exposed when using travis (just include an
> >>> >> image). As for the rest of the tags, it might require some extra
> >>> >> hacking.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> So, before I start digging more into this, I wanted to get other
> >>> >> opinions/ideas on this topic and how we can make this information
> >>> >> more evident to the rest of the community (and people not as
> familiar
> >>> with our processes as some of us are).
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Thanks in advance,
> >>> >> Flavio
> >>> >>
> >>> >> [0] http://governance.openstack.org/reference/projects/index.html
> >>> >>
> >>> >
> >>> >Is your proposal that a tag like release:cycle-with-milestones would
> >>> >result in a badge being added when the README.rst is rendered on
> >>> >github.com? Would that work for git.openstack.org, too?
> >>>
> >>> I don't think it'd work for git.openstack.org because it doesn't
> render
> >>> the
> >>> README's[0] like github does. One thing I'd like to avoid is for this
> >>> information to result in new changes to the README file everytime the
> >>> tags
> >>> are updated because I'd like for this information to not be duplicated
> >>> and
> >>> to
> >>> make it clear that this information is not meant to be updated
> manually.
> >>>
> >>> Here's[1] an example of what it would look like (or kinda).
> >>>
> >>> [0] http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/glance/tree/README.rst
> >>> [1] https://github.com/celery/kombu/blob/master/README.rst
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> >I agree that the governance site is not the best place to put the info
> >>> >to make it discoverable. Do users look first at the source repository,
> >>> >or at some other documentation?
> >>>
> >>> The feedback* I've gotten is that users normally look at repos first
> and
> >>> they
> >>> go from there to docs (which are normally linked in the README file).
> >>>
> >>> * Neither based on a survey nor on any empirical research. This is
> based
> >>> on
> >>>   hallway talks.
> >>>
> >>> Flavio
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> @flaper87
> >>> Flavio Percoco
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >> ____________________________________________________________
> ______________
> >> 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
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > @flaper87
> > Flavio Percoco
> >
> > ____________________________________________________________
> ______________
> > 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
> >
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> 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
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20161130/e0f6ac11/attachment-0001.html>