Open Stack

On 23/01/17 22:07, Tom Fifield wrote:
> On 23/01/17 22:04, Alexandra Settle wrote:
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>>
>>
>> I would like to know if we have ever discussed appropriately archiving
>> documentation after EOL date?
>>
>>
>>
>> Tom triaged this bug
>> https://bugs.launchpad.net/openstack-manuals/+bug/1658659 this morning,
>> where the reporter noted that Icehouse documentation was not found on
>> docs.openstack.org. The reporter noted that it was EOL, but was 404ing
>> and did not redirect to any archive folder.
>>
>>
>>
>> Normally, I’m not too sure I’d be concerned about documentation as far
>> back as Icehouse but as Tom notes in the bug, “With 9% of users still
>> having Icehouse in production as at October 2016, I tend to agree.” The
>> number of users was something I was unaware of – thank you, Tom.
>>
>>
>>
>> Did we ever have a process in place to appropriately archive
>> documentation? Was there a reason we do not archive documentation after
>> EOL dates?
>>
>>
>>
>> If we were to archive documentation, I would recommend something similar
>> to the following:
>>
>> 1.       Anything that is EOL’d is converted to a PDF document by the
>> release team (now we have the functionality to do so).
>>
>> 2.       EOL branch is deleted as per normal.
>>
>> 3.       Each document is branded with “End of life – cannot be edited”
>> or something of that nature.
>>
>> 4.       Kept in Archive folder on main docs.o.o page.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thoughts? Or is there a piece of history here that I am missing?
>>
>
> Related bug for the general issue:
>
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/openstack-manuals/+bug/1621685 

Check this out, it's what Martin Paolo referred to in the above report:




Every page on the django docs has a hover-over listing the version of 
the documentation being read. You mouse over it, and you can choose to 
navigate back to that specific page for the release you need - even the 
old/insecure/unsupported version from 2014. The URLs are all standard too.

So, that's best practice. How close can we get?




Regards,


Tom

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-docs/attachments/20170123/a1ba6c75/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: fcfdbpckjgnbdemm.png
Type: image/png
Size: 79011 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-docs/attachments/20170123/a1ba6c75/attachment-0001.png>