Open Stack

On Mon, 2019-02-25 at 11:53 +0000, Chris Dent wrote:
> On Sun, 24 Feb 2019, Jay Pipes wrote:
> 
> > There was some light discussion about it on IRC a couple weeks ago. I 
> > mentioned my preference was to not have a separate specs repo nor use the 
> > Launchpad blueprints feature. I'd rather have a "ideas" folder or similar 
> > inside the placement repo itself that tracks longer-form proposals in 
> > Markdown documents.
> 
> I like no-separate-specs-repo ideas as well and got the sense that
> most people felt the same way.
> 
> I think still having some kinds of specs for at least some changes
> is a good idea, as in the past it has helped us talk through an API
> to get it closer to right before writing it. We don't need
> spec-cores and I reckon the rules for what needs a spec can be
> loosened, depending on how people feel.
> 
> (Markdown! I'd love to do markdown but using existing tooling, and
> including all these artifacts in the existing docs (even if they are
> just "ideas") seems a good thing.)

This is the only bit of this I actually have a strong opinion on :)
Please, please stick to rST+Sphinx. It's certainly flawed but there is
value in going to any OpenStack project and knowing how the
documentation will work.

/me goes back to lurking.

Stephen