> On Jun 2, 2016, at 7:23 AM, Russell Bryant <rbryant at redhat.com> wrote: > > > On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 4:18 AM, Thierry Carrez <thierry at openstack.org <mailto:thierry at openstack.org>> wrote: > Doug Hellmann wrote: > The point is more that I think it would mix two sets of unrelated > content. Unless we’re talking about separate repositories that are > published to a subtree under the governance domain? > > Yes, separate repositories published to subtrees. > > In fact we already plan to build "governance.openstack.org <http://governance.openstack.org/>" from data coming out of 2 repositories (openstack/governance and openstack/elections) in the near future. Adding a third repository is definitely a possibility. > > The way I see it we can have: > > - openstack/governance driving the neutral /index.html and /tc/ > - openstack/usercommittee driving /uc/ content > - openstack/elections driving /elections/ content > > each with its own set of approvers. We'd make it clear on the page footer which repository the page is built from so that people know where to go to propose changes. > > We'd keep redirects (or aliases) so that existing deep links to /reference/ and /resolutions/ continue to work. > > How does that sound ? > > Sounds good to me. That all works for me. Doug > > > -- > Russell Bryant > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-TC mailing list > OpenStack-TC at lists.openstack.org <mailto:OpenStack-TC at lists.openstack.org> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-tc <http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-tc> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-tc/attachments/20160602/af234500/attachment.html>