Open Stack

On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 3:52 PM, Tom Fifield <tom at openstack.org> wrote:

> On 02/08/13 06:43, Anne Gentle wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 3:27 PM, Tom Fifield <tom at openstack.org
> > <mailto:tom at openstack.org>> wrote:
> >
> >     > The titles that we'll release Oct 17th, regardless of number of
> >     bugs, are:
> >     >
> >     >  - Compute Administration Guide (contains Identity and Images)
> >
> >
> >     I disagree with releasing inaccurate information, and would instead
> opt
> >     for incomplete documentation. Very important distinctions in types of
> >     bugs - those that denote something missing and those that denote
> >     something is wrong.
> >
> >     Then, I believe that just verifying the accuracy of the information
> in
> >     the Compute Administration Guide (i.e. we don't have bugs for many
> areas
> >     that are potentially wrong) is going to take a lot of effort, and I
> have
> >     yet to see where this will come from.
> >
> >     My suggestion would be to focus on the documents that we can make
> >     accurate prior to release and publish the 'full library' at a later
> >     date.
> >
> >
> > So nice to have you in our time zone Tom. :)
> >
> > I think the actual design layout will help us realize that "releases"
> > will look different for Havana. We won't have that redesign for a few
> > weeks, so we're talking abstractedly but have concrete views already
> > cemented.
> >
> > I'm asserting that the only guides that we can ever guarantee to be
> > synchronized with released code are install and config (automated). All
> > others are released continuously. Yes it means inaccuracies may exist
> > but bugs exist in the code too. We can certainly leave out entire
> > sections or chapters if they're just too buggy.
> >
> > I don't think that there will be a Havana Compute Administration Guide
> > on October 17th, there will be a "continuously published from master"
> > Compute Administration Guide.
> >
> > The ownership is what concerns me -- Neutron "owns" their Networking
> > Admin Guide, so does Cinder. Nova and Swift, not so much ownership. So
> > are you proposing removal of Compute Admin Guide and Object Storage
> > Admin Guide until owners step up? I can certainly consider that here.
> >
> > I think we agree -- its just that the full Havana library is just two
> > books. The rest of the books are on the shelf with a published date on
> > them. I hope the redesign will help users understand this.
>
> Using Jet Lag to advantage :)
>
> So yes - I am leaning towards 'not having' as a consideration.
>
>

So here's where I'm at while mulling it over for a while... I don't think
we get rid of the Admin Guide titles, yet. (Titles. Contents I can
completely delete or move without a problem.) I think we delete contents
until only accurate content is in them. But, we also need to have this
conversation on the openstack-dev list. I started it here on openstack-docs
but these are documents that belong to everyone and we need to expand our
conversation. I'll get that post out Monday.

Also, soon we'll have more info about the redesign and we can revisit then
again. Hopefully this week I'll have the draft redesign which fixes the
problem with people reading outdated info because the release info is hard
to find. (bug 1191447)
https://bugs.launchpad.net/openstack-manuals/+bug/1191447 This redesign may
help us shape the title list as well.


> I disagree that we should be publishing inaccurate information.
> If we can't verify that it's OK, it shouldn't be on an official document
> on openstack.org.
>

This statement is not one I can back or support. We need to be careful
about throwing around words like "official" because there are a lot of
grassroots efforts around docs, training, HA, and I do not want to squelch
those efforts or discourage them in any way by raising the bar way too high
for contributing to docs.openstack.org or api.openstack.org.  I can support
statements like "we strive for accuracy and test as throughly as possible"
but I cannot back anything strongly stated about "official" because the
Board and the TC are still working through "what is core?" and other such
important questions. Read more at
http://robhirschfeld.com/2013/07/24/what-is-core-strawman/ if you want some
background, it's important we all understand what we're working through as
a community.


>
> What needs to happen, in my opinion, is a complete gutting of the
> guides, and sections only added back in when they have been verified to
> be technically accurate (potentially also copyedited, scoped and
> structured ^_^). I disagree that just because something is 'continously
> published' means that this step can be avoided.
>
>
Gutting is happening now. I believe the Compute Admin Guide especially will
be quite gutted.

Hope this helps - thanks for keeping the feedback going and look for the
discussion with the wider community this week.
Anne


> Regards,
>
>
> Tom
>
>
>
>
>


-- 
Anne Gentle
annegentle at justwriteclick.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-docs/attachments/20130804/01e7a8e2/attachment.html>