[Openstack-docs] Linking to external install guides

Tom Fifield tom at openstack.org
Thu Jul 11 03:26:45 UTC 2013


On 11/07/13 01:43, Anne Gentle wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 10:21 AM, Steve Gordon <sgordon at redhat.com
> <mailto:sgordon at redhat.com>> wrote:
>
>     ----- Original Message -----
>      > From: "Lorin Hochstein" <lorin at nimbisservices.com
>     <mailto:lorin at nimbisservices.com>>
>      > To: "Steve Gordon" <sgordon at redhat.com <mailto:sgordon at redhat.com>>
>      > Cc: "Tom Fifield" <tom at openstack.org <mailto:tom at openstack.org>>,
>     openstack-docs at lists.openstack.org
>     <mailto: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.
>
>
> What has happened in the past is Razique would upgrade in production,
> keeping good notes, then bring them in to the documentation.
>
> Razique documented cactus to diablo and diablo to essex:
> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/18053/3 in December 2012.
>
> Alvaro Garcia did essex to folsom in
> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/21657/ in Feb 2013.
>
> Razique's still assigned to folsom to grizzly.
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/openstack-manuals/+bug/1087483
>
> He may have decent notes and just hasn't put them in a patch yet so
> check with him.
>
>
>      > 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?
>
>
> Usually it goes in the Install Guide, just the timing is after the release.

You'll get no argument from me about this - it's a bit of an embarrasing 
thing right now that upgrades are so hard :)

We have some generic information here: 
http://docs.openstack.org/trunk/openstack-ops/content/maintenance.html#upgrades

and I have some more stuff to steal from NeCTAR who are doing their 
Folsom->Grizzly upgrade today after a couple of months of prep.

>
>
>
>      > On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 8:43 AM, Steve Gordon <sgordon at redhat.com
>     <mailto:sgordon at redhat.com>> wrote:
>      >
>      > > ----- Original Message -----
>      > > > From: "Tom Fifield" <tom at openstack.org
>     <mailto:tom at openstack.org>>
>      > > > To: openstack-docs at lists.openstack.org
>     <mailto: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
>     <mailto:lorin at nimbisservices.com>>
>      > > > >> To: "Steve Gordon" <sgordon at redhat.com
>     <mailto:sgordon at redhat.com>>
>      > > > >> Cc: "Anne Gentle" <annegentle at justwriteclick.com
>     <mailto:annegentle at justwriteclick.com>>,
>      > > > >> openstack-docs at lists.openstack.org
>     <mailto: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 <mailto:sgordon at redhat.com>>
>      > > wrote:
>      > > > >>
>      > > > >>> ----- Original Message -----
>      > > > >>>> From: "Anne Gentle" <annegentle at justwriteclick.com
>     <mailto:annegentle at justwriteclick.com>>
>      > > > >>>> To: "Lorin Hochstein" <lorin at nimbisservices.com
>     <mailto:lorin at nimbisservices.com>>
>      > > > >>>> Cc: openstack-docs at lists.openstack.org
>     <mailto: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
>     <mailto: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 <http://www.nimbisservices.com>
>      >
>
>     --
>     Steve Gordon, RHCE
>     Documentation Lead, Red Hat OpenStack
>     Engineering Content Services
>     Red Hat Canada (Toronto, Ontario)
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Openstack-docs mailing list
>     Openstack-docs at lists.openstack.org
>     <mailto:Openstack-docs at lists.openstack.org>
>     http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-docs
>
>
>
>
> --
> Anne Gentle
> annegentle at justwriteclick.com <mailto:annegentle at justwriteclick.com>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Openstack-docs mailing list
> Openstack-docs at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-docs
>




More information about the Openstack-docs mailing list