Open Stack

On Fri, 15 Apr 2016 16:43:01 +0200
Andreas Jaeger <aj at suse.com> wrote:

> On 04/15/2016 02:58 PM, Steve Gordon wrote:
> > I touched on this in the review but I think the missing piece here is identifying where the content for fuel/kolla/tripleo/openstack-ansible/openstack-puppet/openstack-chef would actually be linked in. I don't think it makes sense for these to be grouped in at the end like an additional module to be installed (as opposed to e.g. magnum, manila, trove, etc.), because each of them is actually itself an deployment path for all of OpenStack. It might be a better fit to link the deployment focused big tent projects into the overview in the context of "Trying to perform more advanced installation and configuration? Check out these guides.".
> 
> Yes, we could have a deployment chapter and link to these (if we do them
> out of tree) - or have a chapter for each of them included.

It would be great to have a separate deployment section somewhere on
docs.o.o, actually. Some of these tools are hosted under
docs.openstack.org/developer/ and I don't think many users will navigate
to /developer to find out more about different deployment paths.

Cheers, 
pk