[Openstack-operators] Ops Community Documentation - first anchor point

Amy Marrich amy at demarco.com
Wed Jun 27 00:40:33 UTC 2018

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>

> 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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-operators/attachments/20180626/a463a079/attachment.html>

More information about the OpenStack-operators mailing list