Open Stack

Hello docs team!

Ok, I have tweaked the blueprint a little:
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Blueprint-os-admin-docs. Again, this is the
blueprint for what is supposed to be the new Cloud Administration Guide,
pieced out from the individual component guides.

Diane, if everyone is on board with this plan, could we create a new git
folder for this new guide and make a plan for migration of the different
parts into it?

Thank you all!

Nermina


On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 12:42 AM, Nermina Miller <nerminamiller at gmail.com>wrote:

> Hello everyone,
>
> Here's the preliminary blueprint:
> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Blueprint-os-admin-docs.
>
> I need to clean it up a little, but most of it is there.
>
> Please do send me some feedback regarding the layout, purpose and the next
> steps.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Nermina
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 1:35 PM, Anne Gentle <anne at openstack.org> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 11:46 AM, Nermina Miller <nerminamiller at gmail.com
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> Just a quick note that I've begun working on the blueprint revision. I'm
>>> using the version posted by Nick (
>>> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Blueprint-os-admin-docs). I will be
>>> matching up the remaining parts with that ToC. - Nermina
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> Good thinking. A patch is nice but a blueprint helps us all see the
>> history. To me, that ToC is still too big... can you remove install and
>> config info and then match up remaining parts?
>>
>> Also I want Diane to get further on the Admin User Guide so we have a
>> good chance to step back and look at that. I know you've been in there, do
>> you see a difference between an Admin Guide and an Admin User Guide?
>>
>> For next tasks per guide here's what I envision:
>>
>> Nermina: Pare down the "OpenStack Admin Guide" outline/blueprint based on
>> what's leftover now
>> Action: Find someone to pare down the Network Admin Guide -- does config
>> info remain in that specific guide? Not sure. Anne to ask Edgar.
>> Anne: Remove the Object Storage Admin Guide folder and move relevant info
>> to new homes. https://bugs.launchpad.net/openstack-manuals/+bug/1216037
>> Diane: Complete Admin User Guide (prior to Docs Boot Camp)
>> Done: Pare down the Block Storage Admin Guide.
>>
>> More embedded below.
>>
>>
>>> On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 10:10 PM, Anne Gentle <
>>> annegentle at justwriteclick.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi all,
>>>> I wanted to circle back on these items. I've been in touch with the
>>>> PTLs and their teams, I wrote to the dev list, then I thought some more,
>>>> and it has taken a while.
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 12:12 PM, Anne Gentle <
>>>> annegentle at justwriteclick.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 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.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I got our release manager, Thierry Carrez's response to my post to the
>>>> openstack-dev mailing list as a good indicator that going to continuous
>>>> release for many books would be just fine. [1]
>>>>
>>>> I also went to four team meetings to get input directly from the teams
>>>> themselves for these four titles:
>>>>
>>>>  - Block Storage Service Administration Guide
>>>>  - Compute Administration Guide (contains Identity and Images)
>>>>  - Networking Administration Guide
>>>>  - Object Storage Administration Guide
>>>>
>>>> I'll go through each in turn.
>>>>
>>>>  - Block Storage Service Administration Guide
>>>> The team is fine with putting their config and install info into other
>>>> books, and that leaves only the "Managing Volumes" chapter in this title.
>>>> This patch does this reorg work:
>>>> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/40451/. After that patch goes
>>>> through, if we can find a home for "Managing Volumes," perhaps in the Ops
>>>> Guide, not sure yet, then we can eliminate this separate book. Sorry that
>>>> the patch has gotten a little large, it wasn't my intent (to have that
>>>> large of a patch). Hopefully this explanation helps.
>>>>
>>>>
>> This patch is now merged.
>>
>>
>>>   - Compute Administration Guide (contains Identity and Images)
>>>>
>>>> The nova team is also fine with whatever we as a doc team think is
>>>> best. Lots of trust there! :) We've done a lot of gutting of this guide,
>>>> and it still has some content that doesn't have a home. Specifically:
>>>> Overall architecture
>>>> Identity Management
>>>> Image Management
>>>> Networking with nova-network
>>>> System Administration
>>>> OpenStack Interfaces
>>>> Security Hardening
>>>> OpenStack Compute Automated Installations
>>>> Compute Tutorials
>>>> Troubleshooting
>>>>
>>>> I think these can all find other homes, but I'm not exactly sure where
>>>> yet. The patch I refer to above does some of the moving as well.
>>>>
>>>>
>> Nermina, hopefully you find new homes for these. These can also be
>> deleted if they are outdated and inaccurate.
>>
>>
>>>   - Networking Administration Guide
>>>> This team is also fine with removing config information and placing it
>>>> in the Config Reference. However, this is one guide that I'm not convinced
>>>> we should completely eliminate. It contains use cases for configuration and
>>>> a high availability chapter and some plugin scenarios that aren't any where
>>>> else. It's possible the use cases and "Under the Hood" could go into the
>>>> Configuration Reference, but there are also advanced ops features like
>>>> logging, notifications, and quotas in this guide. The neutron doc bug is
>>>> used for 7 doc bugs, so compared to nova's 100+ doc bugs, is this guide
>>>> actually in okay shape to keep as its own book. It seems like it to me but
>>>> I want more input. What do you all think?
>>>>
>>>>
>> I'm going to ask Edgar Magana if he can take a look. I triaged more doc
>> bugs for neutron/quantum and there's more like 20 doc bugs so they're not
>> in really great shape.
>>
>>
>>>   - Object Storage Administration Guide
>>>> This team is fine with removal from openstack-manuals once all the info
>>>> is correctly placed. For example, Configuring Object Storage with the S3
>>>> API needs to go to the Configuration Reference. Tom has a WIP patch going
>>>> on right now that scrapes their sample configs and puts them into tables,
>>>> thankfully getting rid of the raw.github.com links I had placed,
>>>> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/43032/. Thanks Tom!
>>>>
>>>> These are the chapters and sections that need to find a new home:
>>>> OpenStack Object Storage Tutorials
>>>> Object Storage Monitoring
>>>>
>>>> All this said, the remaining content of three Admin guides could be
>>>> either:
>>>> the starting point for an OpenStack Administration Guide
>>>>  or
>>>> moved into the Operations Guide.
>>>>
>>>> Nick and/or Nermina, are you willing to do a patch for review that
>>>> brings the remaining parts into an OpenStack Admin guide or is that too
>>>> "Frankendoc" (trying to revive dead parts to make a whole?) Or do these
>>>> final parts belong in the Operations Guide? We have about 2 and a half
>>>> weeks before Docs Boot Camp, seems like enough time to get a WIP patch to
>>>> see how it looks. Interested?
>>>>
>>>>
>> Yeah maybe I'm getting ahead of myself and really I want a blueprint and
>> outline not a patch quite yet. :) Thanks Nermina!
>>  Anne
>>
>>
>>>  Thanks again for patience and all this analysis. I do realize I
>>>> haven't attended keystone and glance weekly meetings, but their portions
>>>> are small and I wanted to get this out now. I'll talk to them next.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>> Anne
>>>>
>>>> 1.
>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2013-August/013352.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 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
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Openstack-docs mailing list
>>>> Openstack-docs at lists.openstack.org
>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-docs
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Thank you!
>>>
>>> Nermina Miller
>>> Tech Writer and Editor
>>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Thank you!
>
> Nermina Miller
> Tech Writer and Editor
>



-- 
Thank you!

Nermina Miller
Tech Writer and Editor
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-docs/attachments/20130830/4fdbac69/attachment-0001.html>