On 28 April 2016 at 12:05, Lana Brindley <openstack at lanabrindley.com> wrote: > On 28/04/16 11:59, Anne Gentle wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 11:54 AM, Christian Berendt < > christian at berendt.io <mailto:christian at berendt.io>> wrote: > > > > On 28 April 2016 at 11:51:16, Andreas Jaeger (aj at suse.com <mailto: > aj at suse.com>(mailto:aj at suse.com <mailto:aj at suse.com>)) wrote: > > > > > Does anybody see problems with that? Otherwise let's do that > before we > > > tackle the rest of the RST conversion. > > > > Makes sense to me. What about the other guides? > > > > Should we discuss to move all guides (over the migration to RST) > into the openstack-manuals repository? I do not know why we have decided in > the past to create separate repositories for some of the guides. > > > > > > It was for enabling review teams who knew the content best. This model > still makes sense for security guide to me. I'm fine with the Ops Guide > going back into openstack-manuals but do check with anyone who has +2 > specifically on the separate repo please. > > > > Yeah, Security Guide needs to stay in its own repo because it has > different reviewing rules and needs to maintain its own core team. I've got > no problem with the others moving if it's possible to do so, though. > > L > > -- > Lana Brindley > Technical Writer > Rackspace Cloud Builders Australia > http://lanabrindley.com > > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-docs mailing list > OpenStack-docs at lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-docs > > I think it makes sense so long as the cores are on board. Security to stay in it's own repo, other guides to move into openstack-manuals. Brian -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-docs/attachments/20160428/a1e4ce4f/attachment-0001.html>