Usually in community people take responsibility and initiative to do what they want.
Whoever is first to take initiative wins :) Currently developers have put the documents where code is. One can show the way by taking initiative. Regards -Harshad > On May 16, 2017, at 3:38 AM, CARVER, PAUL <[email protected]> wrote: > > If I remember correctly, rst has a bit of a Python linkage while markdown is > more widely used, but the most important question is tooling. Github will > render both automatically but should Github be the primary place for Contrail > publication? > > OpenStack publishes to https://docs.openstack.org by rendering source files > in Git to HTML with Github serving only as a secondary mirror of the Git > repos. The older documentation has been in Docbook XML but a lot of > programmers dislike dealing with that at all (and I strongly agreed, I'd much > rather deal with either markdown or rst than Docbook) so much of OpenStack > documentation has moved to rst. > > If we're going to have a https://docs.opencontrail.org generated by > Jenkins/Zuul from source files in Git repos then someone will need to setup > the CI pipeline so it would be worth getting input from whoever has the most > experience with the existing Contrail CI pipelines. > > The important thing is to be clear about it because you can't mix and match. > I recently cleaned up networking-vpp documentation because someone had > written markdown in an rst file and that doesn't render properly at all, even > with Github's automatic rendering. > > > > > -- > Paul Carver > V: 732.545.7377 > C: 908.803.1656 > > > > -------- Original message -------- > From: Harshad Nakil <[email protected]> > Date: 5/16/17 00:38 (GMT-05:00) > To: Edgar Magana <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [opencontrail-dev] Slide deck from the OCUG meeting > > We have been using markdown for all documentation. > But of course "community" thinks that developers don't understand anything. > > Regards > -Harshad > > > On May 15, 2017, at 9:32 PM, Edgar Magana <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Those will work as well. Maybe, this is a good opportunity to get feedback >> from the community. >> >> What do you OpenContrail member wanted to use? >> >> Cheers, >> >> Edgar >> >> >> On May 15, 2017, at 8:22 PM, Randy Bias <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> What about Markdown? >>> >>> >>> --Randy >>> >>> VP, Technology and Strategy, Cloud Software >>> Juniper Networks >>> +1 (415) 787-2253 [SMS or voice] >>> ASSISTANT: Stephanie Concepcion, [email protected] >>> TWITTER: twitter.com/randybias >>> LINKEDIN: linkedin.com/in/randybias >>> >>> >>> >>> *** Sent from mobile, pls forgive tpyoes *** >>> >>> On May 15, 2017, at 20:21, Edgar Magana <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Randy, >>>> >>>> In my experience .rst files are very easy to manage for documentation and >>>> processes. >>>> >>>> Edgar >>>> >>>> >>>> On May 15, 2017, at 8:05 PM, Randy Bias <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> What format in Github? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> --Randy >>>>> >>>>> Vice President, Technology & Strategy, Cloud Software >>>>> Juniper Networks >>>>> +1 (415) 787-2253 [Google Voice] >>>>> ASSISTANT: Stephanie Concepcion, [email protected] >>>>> TWITTER: @randybias >>>>> LINKEDIN: linkedin.com/in/randybias >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> From: Edgar Magana <[email protected]> >>>>> Date: Monday, May 15, 2017 at 1:50 PM >>>>> To: "CARVER, PAUL" <[email protected]>, Randy Bias <[email protected]>, >>>>> "[email protected]" <[email protected]> >>>>> Subject: Re: [opencontrail-dev] Slide deck from the OCUG meeting >>>>> >>>>> Folks, >>>>> >>>>> These are all excellent points. Would it be possible to have all these >>>>> details in github repos? >>>>> That will be easy to follow up the conversations instead of using email. >>>>> Well, just my proposal. It is working well for other open source >>>>> communities such as OpenStack. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> >>>>> Edgar >>>>> >>>>> From: Dev <[email protected]> on behalf of "CARVER, >>>>> PAUL" <[email protected]> >>>>> Date: Monday, May 15, 2017 at 5:06 AM >>>>> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, >>>>> "[email protected]" <[email protected]> >>>>> Subject: [opencontrail-dev] Slide deck from the OCUG meeting >>>>> >>>>> Randy, >>>>> >>>>> Thanks for your presentation at the Open Contrail Users Group last week. >>>>> Can you please post a public link to your slide deck for people who were >>>>> unable to attend or who didn’t take phone photos of every slide. >>>>> Especially, the link to the Google Group needs to go out so that everyone >>>>> on the Dev mailing list can sign up. >>>>> >>>>> I have a list of potential topics for the first meeting of whatever forum >>>>> you end up organizing. >>>>> >>>>> Compiling Contrail from source – There has been a fair amount of >>>>> discussion of this on the mailing list recently >>>>> Discussion of issues people are encountering >>>>> Build scripts >>>>> Prerequisites >>>>> Documentation of the build process >>>>> Due dates >>>>> An overview of current key dates in the process (blueprint, code >>>>> complete, testing, documentation, beta, GA) >>>>> Discussion of any changes that might help contributors plan better >>>>> Dates for dates – set expectations on how and when the key dates for >>>>> future releases will be set >>>>> Missed date management – discussion of how slipped dates for Juniper’s GA >>>>> release impact community development >>>>> Testing procedures >>>>> Discussion of how third party developers should expect to interact with >>>>> Juniper during the time period between code freeze and beta and GA >>>>> Discussion of beta vs release candidate and whether there are process >>>>> improvements needed in order to ensure that third party developers are >>>>> able to catch and fix bugs in the features they are developing >>>>> Overview of test framework, not just unit tests but functional and full >>>>> stack automated tests >>>>> Documentation >>>>> How are non-Juniper developers expected to deliver documentation for >>>>> features that they develop? >>>>> When is documentation due? >>>>> Core reviewer / TSC / meetings >>>>> What are the expectations for a non-Juniper developer to become a core >>>>> reviewer? >>>>> Does Contrail have anything equivalent to a Technical Steering Committee? >>>>> Are there any regularly scheduled meetings (e.g. on Slack/IRC or >>>>> teleconference) for developers to sync up on progress of their changes, >>>>> discuss code reviews, discuss bugs, etc >>>>> Build system problems – How can non-Juniper contributors effectively >>>>> troubleshoot issues like this: >>>>> https://jenkins.opencontrail.org/job/ci-contrail-vrouter-systest-ubuntu14-mitaka/480/console >>>>> >>>>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.opencontrail.org/mailman/listinfo/dev_lists.opencontrail.org
_______________________________________________ Dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.opencontrail.org/mailman/listinfo/dev_lists.opencontrail.org
