Open Stack

Excerpts from Zane Bitter's message of 2018-05-02 11:38:55 -0400:
> On 01/05/18 16:21, Doug Hellmann wrote:
> > Excerpts from Andreas Jaeger's message of 2018-05-01 21:51:19 +0200:
> >> On 05/01/2018 04:08 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote:
> >>> The TC has had an item on our backlog for a while (a year?) to
> >>> document "constellations" of OpenStack components to make it easier
> >>> for deployers and users to understand which parts they need to have
> >>> the features they want [1].
> >>>
> >>> John Garbutt has started writing the first such document [2], but
> >>> as we talked about the content we agreed the TC governance repository
> >>> is not the best home for it, so I have proposed creating a new
> >>> repository [3].
> >>>
> >>> In order to set up the publishing jobs for that repo so the content
> >>> goes to docs.openstack.org, we need to settle the ownership of the
> >>> repository.
> >>>
> >>> I think it makes sense for the documentation team to "own" it, but
> >>> I also think it makes sense for it to have its own review team
> >>> because it's a bit different from the rest of the docs and we may
> >>> be able to recruit folks to help who might not want to commit to
> >>> being core reviewers for all of the documentation repositories. The
> >>> TC members would also like to be reviewers, to get things going.
> >>>
> >>> So, is the documentation team willing to add the new "constellations"
> >>> repository under their umbrella? Or should we keep it as a TC-owned
> >>> repository for now?
> >>
> >> I'm fine having it as parts of the docs team. The docs PTL should be
> >> part of the review team for sure,
> >>
> >> Andreas
> > 
> > Yeah, I wasn't really clear there: I intend to set up the documentation
> > and TC teams as members of the new team, so that all members of both
> > groups can be reviewers of the new repository.
> 
> +1. What would be the reviewer criteria? Majority vote for adding new 
> constellations and 2x +2 for changes maybe? Or just 2x +2 for 
> everything? Just to clarify, since the TC reviews usually operate pretty 
> differently to other code reviews.
> 
> thanks,
> ZB
> 

This is just documentation, so 2x +2 is what I had in mind.

Doug