Open Stack

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Tom Fifield" <tom at openstack.org>
> To: "Steve Gordon" <sgordon at redhat.com>
> Cc: openstack-docs at lists.openstack.org
> Sent: Thursday, August 1, 2013 4:58:41 PM
> Subject: Re: [Openstack-docs] Common content strategy?
> 
> On 02/08/13 06:17, Steve Gordon wrote:
> > ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: "Tom Fifield" <tom at openstack.org>
> >> To: "Steve Gordon" <sgordon at redhat.com>
> >> Cc: openstack-docs at lists.openstack.org
> >> Sent: Thursday, August 1, 2013 4:08:35 PM
> >> Subject: Re: [Openstack-docs] Common content strategy?
> >>
> >> On 02/08/13 06:06, Steve Gordon wrote:
> >>> ----- Original Message -----
> >>>> From: "Tom Fifield" <tom at openstack.org>
> >>>> To: openstack-docs at lists.openstack.org
> >>>> Sent: Thursday, August 1, 2013 3:53:54 PM
> >>>> Subject: Re: [Openstack-docs] Common content strategy?
> >>>>
> >>>> Just quickly on the crazy linking that's going on right now.
> >>>>
> >>>> I'm one of the worst offenders of breaking the model, but I believe
> >>>> there's good reason ... in doing the restructure, I'm trying to keep
> >>>> current things in place, but note that they'll be subsumed as further
> >>>> progress is made.
> >>>>
> >>>> If there's a big effort to push content into the common folder right
> >>>> now, you'll end up with most of the compute admin manual and the config
> >>>> reference in the common folder.
> >>>
> >>> Given at this stage the intent is to continue to release the compute
> >>> administration guide isn't that correct though (in that the content *is*
> >>> common to both)? Keep in mind here also that large swaths of the compute
> >>> admin manual already appear in common (this is in part why I brought up
> >>> the taxonomy question).
> >>
> >> Not for the next release, unless you want to write it :)
> > 
> > OK, it was still listed last I saw - just not as one of the two
> > deliverables that must be ready:
> > 
> > http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-docs/2013-July/002391.html
> 
> Yep, I disagree with this, so I've replied to that thread :)
> 
> >> Additionally, the content in config ref that is currently xi:included
> >> will be struck from the compute admin guide - it will not be common to
> >> both.
> > 
> > Right, but to me that is all the more reason to do it now. As it currently
> > stands without any of my commits on this issue being merged there are ~144
> > relative includes in openstack-config, of those only 10 go to locations
> > outside of common (which are the ones I want to move).
> 
> So https://review.openstack.org/#/c/39731 is an example of where this
> consolidation is a bad idea right now :)
> 
> I'm in the middle of working through re-doing which xen bit sit wher,
> and would just end up un-doing the move proposed in the patch.

The problem though is bits and pieces of that redo are already committed, resulting in this kind of structure:

* openstack-config/ch_computehypervisors.xml
  * Includes -> ../common/introduction-to-xen.xml
    * Includes -> ../openstack-config/compute-configure-xen.xml
      * Includes -> ../common/tables/nova-xen.xml

Are you suggesting that your approach to this will be to move the 3/4 files in this chain that are in common now to openstack-config, rather than the opposite as proposed in my patch? If the plan is for these files to move to openstack-config and be dropped from the other guide(s) then I'd suggest making a list and let's get it done.

Thanks,

Steve