Open Stack

Hi All...

I'm still a little confused by the state of this :)

I know I made some promises then got distracted the looks like Sean
stepped up and got things a bit further, but where is it now?  Do we
have an active repo?

It would be nice to have the repo in place before OPs meetup.

-Jon

On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 07:40:33PM -0500, Amy Marrich wrote:
:Sean put together some really great things here and I do think the SiG
:might be the way to go as far as ownership for the repos and the plan looks
:pretty complete. I've offered to do the Git and Gerrit Lunch and Learn at
:the OPS mmetup if needed to help get folks set up and going.
:
:Amy (spotz)
:
:On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 11:42 AM, Sean McGinnis <sean.mcginnis at gmx.com>
:wrote:
:
:> Reviving this thread with a fresh start. See below for the original.
:>
:> To recap, the ops community is willing to take over some of the operator
:> documentation that is no longer available due to the loss of documentation
:> team
:> resources. From discussions, there needs to be some official governance
:> over
:> this operator owned repo (or repos) so it is recommended that a sig be
:> formed.
:> The repos can be created in the meantime, but consideration needs to be
:> taken
:> about naming as by default, the repo name is what is reflected in the
:> documentation publishing location.
:>
:> SIG Formation
:> -------------
:> There were a couple suggestions on naming and focus for this sig, but I
:> would
:> like to make a slightly different proposal. I would actually like to see a
:> sig-operator group formed. We have repos for operator tools and other
:> useful
:> things and we have a mix of operators, vendors, and others that work
:> together
:> on things like the ops meetup. I think it would make sense to make this
:> into an
:> official SIG that could have a broader scope than just documentation.
:>
:> Docs Repos
:> ----------
:> Doug made a good suggestion that we may want these things published under
:> something like docs.openstack.org/operations-guide. So based on this, I
:> think
:> for now at least we should create an opestack/operations-guide repo that
:> will
:> end up being owned by this SIG. I would expect most documentation
:> generated or
:> owned by this group would just be located somewhere under that repo, but
:> if the
:> need arises we can add additional repos.
:>
:> There are other ops repos out there right now. I would expect the
:> ownership of
:> those to move under this sig as well, but that is a seperate and less
:> pressing
:> concern at this point.
:>
:> Bug Tracking
:> ------------
:> There should be some way to track tasks and needs for this documentation
:> and
:> any other repos that are moved under this sig. Since it is the currently
:> planned direction for all OpenStack projects (or at least there is a vocal
:> desire for it to be) I think a Storyboard project should be created for
:> this
:> SIG's activities.
:>
:> Plan
:> ----
:> So to recap above, I would propose the following actions be taken:
:>
:> 1. Create sig-operators as a group to manage operator efforts at least
:> related
:>    to what needs to be done in repos.
:> 2. Create an openstack/operations-guide repo to be the new home of the
:>    operations documentation.
:> 3. Create a new StoryBoard project to help track work in these repos
:> x. Document all this.
:> 9. Profit!
:>
:> I'm willing to work through the steps to get these things set up. Please
:> give
:> feedback if this proposed plan makes sense or if there is anything
:> different
:> that would be preferred.
:>
:> Thanks,
:> Sean
:>
:> On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 06:38:32PM -0700, Chris Morgan wrote:
:> > Hello Everyone,
:> >
:> > In the Ops Community documentation working session today in Vancouver, we
:> > made some really good progress (etherpad here:
:> > https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/YVR-Ops-Community-Docs but not all of
:> the
:> > good stuff is yet written down).
:> >
:> > In short, we're going to course correct on maintaining the Operators
:> Guide,
:> > the HA Guide and Architecture Guide, not edit-in-place via the wiki and
:> > instead try still maintaining them as code, but with a different, new set
:> > of owners, possibly in a new Ops-focused repo. There was a strong
:> consensus
:> > that a) code workflow >> wiki workflow and that b) openstack core docs
:> > tools are just fine.
:> >
:> > There is a lot still to be decided on how where and when, but we do have
:> an
:> > offer of a rewrite of the HA Guide, as long as the changes will be
:> allowed
:> > to actually land, so we expect to actually start showing some progress.
:> >
:> > At the end of the session, people wanted to know how to follow along as
:> > various people work out how to do this... and so for now that place is
:> this
:> > very email thread. The idea is if the code for those documents goes to
:> live
:> > in a different repo, or if new contributors turn up, or if a new version
:> we
:> > will announce/discuss it here until such time as we have a better home
:> for
:> > this initiative.
:> >
:> > Cheers
:> >
:> > Chris
:> >
:> > --
:> > Chris Morgan <mihalis68 at gmail.com>
:>
:> > _______________________________________________
:> > OpenStack-operators mailing list
:> > OpenStack-operators at lists.openstack.org
:> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
:>
:>
:> _______________________________________________
:> OpenStack-operators mailing list
:> OpenStack-operators at lists.openstack.org
:> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
:>

:_______________________________________________
:OpenStack-operators mailing list
:OpenStack-operators at lists.openstack.org
:http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators


--