Open Stack

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Lorin Hochstein" <lorin at nimbisservices.com>
> To: "Steve Gordon" <sgordon at redhat.com>
> Cc: "Tom Fifield" <tom at openstack.org>, openstack-docs at lists.openstack.org
> Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2013 9:04:26 AM
> Subject: Re: [Openstack-docs] Linking to external install guides
> 
> This definitely falls under the scope of the documentation effort. Alas, we
> still don't even have the folsom->grizzly process fully documented yet <
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/openstack-manuals/+bug/1087483>.

Yeah, my non-documentation concern is that improvement in this area requires some improved focus on identifying upgrade issues *before* release from the programs actually delivering the code. This is my interpretation just by following along the Folsom->Grizzly bug and attempting such an upgrade myself.

> I added a new bug for documenting grizzly->havana <
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/openstack-manuals/+bug/1199773>.

Thanks, I have started adding some more specific thoughts about the process there. A more general question is where in the documentation suite would we expect that content to live?

Steve 



> On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 8:43 AM, Steve Gordon <sgordon at redhat.com> wrote:
> 
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Tom Fifield" <tom at openstack.org>
> > > To: openstack-docs at lists.openstack.org
> > > Sent: Tuesday, July 9, 2013 8:34:25 PM
> > > Subject: Re: [Openstack-docs] Linking to external install guides
> > >
> > > On 10/07/13 00:48, Steve Gordon wrote:
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > >> From: "Lorin Hochstein" <lorin at nimbisservices.com>
> > > >> To: "Steve Gordon" <sgordon at redhat.com>
> > > >> Cc: "Anne Gentle" <annegentle at justwriteclick.com>,
> > > >> openstack-docs at lists.openstack.org
> > > >> Sent: Tuesday, July 9, 2013 10:38:26 AM
> > > >> Subject: Re: [Openstack-docs] Linking to external install guides
> > > >>
> > > >> On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 3:36 PM, Steve Gordon <sgordon at redhat.com>
> > wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>> ----- Original Message -----
> > > >>>> From: "Anne Gentle" <annegentle at justwriteclick.com>
> > > >>>> To: "Lorin Hochstein" <lorin at nimbisservices.com>
> > > >>>> Cc: openstack-docs at lists.openstack.org
> > > >>>> Sent: Monday, July 8, 2013 11:03:05 AM
> > > >>>> Subject: Re: [Openstack-docs] Linking to external install guides
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> So, for the last few releases, I would update
> > > >>>> http://www.openstack.org/software/start/ with links to the
> > downstream
> > > >>>> deployment documentation. It was natural at the time.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> What has changed as of last week is that documentation is now an
> > > >>>> official
> > > >>>> "Program" and we'll need to propose the goals for the documentation
> > and
> > > >>>> make a scope for release docs. To me, this change means we should be
> > > >>>> more
> > > >>>> tight and targeted with our install docs as they'll be part of the
> > > >>>> integrated release.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Downstream deployment materials tend to cover arguably more
> > streamlined
> > > >>> approaches to deployment, such as Foreman, PackStack, Ansible, JuJu,
> > etc.
> > > >>> The flip side however is these deployment methods are not considered
> > part
> > > >>> of OpenStack itself and may not in fact be ready to deploy a new
> > release
> > > >>> on
> > > >>> day dot. These approaches also don't necessarily have 1:1 equivalents
> > > >>> across distributions.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> For these reasons my feeling is the documentation "program" should be
> > > >>> concentrated on delivering accurate manual installation steps at
> > release
> > > >>> time in a consolidated installation guide as suggested in the
> > restructure
> > > >>> blueprint [1]. I don't think however this precludes also linking the
> > > >>> distribution specific materials somewhere as they become available,
> > it
> > > >>> just
> > > >>> wouldn't be a blocker to the integrated release?
> > > >>>
> > > >>> -Steve
> > > >>>
> > > >>> [1]
> > https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Blueprint-restructure-documentation
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> At the last design summit, we talked about the doc team no longer
> > > >> maintaining any install documentation at all going forward, leaving
> > that
> > > >> entirely to downstream projects. I really do think that's the way we
> > > >> should
> > > >> go. I'm hesitant to maintain docs on a fully manual install (i.e.,
> > from
> > > >> source tarballs), since we really don't want people to do that.
> > > >
> > > > Yes, I realize now I should have clarified that by "manual" I still
> > meant
> > > > using packages - just without aids like those listed in my previous
> > mail.
> > > > I think trying to create and maintain documentation of from source
> > > > installation that would potentially be even harder than this, despite
> > the
> > > > (potential) issues with packaged builds lagging behind the source
> > release.
> > > >
> > > >> It means that documentation on how to do an install won't exist until
> > the
> > > >> downstream projects write these up, but since we recommend installing
> > from
> > > >> downstream packages, I think that's unavoidable. Since we're seeing a
> > lot
> > > >> more support for OpenStack downstream these days, I think those
> > projects
> > > >> have more of an incentive to get their packages and docs ready ASAP
> > after
> > > >> a
> > > >> release.
> > > >
> > > > My understanding is that at least RPM/DEB packages are likely to be
> > > > available *very* shortly after the actual release for Havana.
> > >
> > > I'll take a bullish line, which may not necessarily be achievable:
> > >
> > > """
> > > On the day that the press release for Havana is sent out, we need -by
> > > hook or by crook!- to have installation instructions for RHEL and
> > > Ubuntu, and ideally SUSE and Debian too.
> > > """
> > >
> > > I'm thinking: "if you can't install the software, then it's not really a
> > > release, is it?". Release day is our time to shine :)
> >
> > Well, another huge gap that I think exists here is if you can't upgrade
> > from the previous release it's not really a release. Currently I think this
> > is a huge problem regardless of installation method because the only
> > documentation available for upgrades appears to be some per-project notes
> > in the release notes Wiki page. A bit tangential perhaps and not sure this
> > is really just a documentation problem but thought I would bring it up.
> >
> > > So, feasibility/sanity check:
> > > * This is unlikely to be provided in time by our friends at RH or
> > > Canonical, leaving:
> > > Option 1: Delay the press release
> > > Option 2: DIY
> > >
> > > Personally, I think Option 1 would be terrible for the community's
> > > "feelings", and tying OpenStack to particular product offerings is not
> > > something we should probably be doing :)
> >
> > I've sent a query regarding build schedules for RDO on rdo-list [1]. No
> > doubt there is package tweaking to be done but nightlies are already being
> > built from trunk:
> >
> >     http://repos.fedorapeople.org/repos/openstack/openstack-trunk/
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Steve
> >
> > [1] https://www.redhat.com/archives/rdo-list/2013-July/msg00057.html
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Openstack-docs mailing list
> > Openstack-docs at lists.openstack.org
> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-docs
> >
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Lorin Hochstein
> Lead Architect - Cloud Services
> Nimbis Services, Inc.
> www.nimbisservices.com
> 

-- 
Steve Gordon, RHCE
Documentation Lead, Red Hat OpenStack
Engineering Content Services
Red Hat Canada (Toronto, Ontario)