On 3/1/17, 5:58 PM, "John Dickinson" <m...@not.mn> wrote:

    
    
    On 1 Mar 2017, at 9:52, Alexandra Settle wrote:
    
    > Hi everyone,
    >
    > I would like to propose that we introduce a “Review documentation” period 
on the release schedule.
    >
    > We would formulate it as a deadline, so that it fits in the schedule and 
making it coincide with the RC1 deadline.
    >
    > For projects that are not following the milestones, we would translate 
this new inclusion literally, so if you would like your project to be 
documented at docs.o.o, then doc must be introduced and reviewed one month 
before the branch is cut.
    
    Which docs are these? There are several different sets of docs that are 
hosted on docs.o.o that are managed within a project repo. Are you saying those 
won't get pushed to
    docs.o.o if they are patched within a month of the cycle release?

The only sets of docs that are published on the docs.o.o site that are managed 
in project-specific repos is the project-specific installation guides. That 
management is entirely up to the team themselves, but I would like to push for 
the integration of a “documentation review” period to ensure that those teams 
are reviewing their docs in their own tree. 

This is a preferential suggestion, not a demand. I cannot make you review your 
documentation at any given period.

The ‘month before’ that I refer to would be for introduction of documentation 
and a review period. I will not stop any documentation being pushed to the repo 
unless, of course, it is untested and breaks the installation process. 
    
    
    >
    > In the last week since we released Ocata, it has become increasingly 
apparent that the documentation was not updated from the development side. We 
were not aware of a lot of new enhancements, features, or major bug fixes for 
certain projects. This means we have released with incorrect/out-of-date 
documentation. This is not only an unfortunately bad reflection on our team, 
but on the project teams themselves.
    >
    > The new inclusion to the schedule may seem unnecessary, but a lot of 
people rely on this and the PTL drives milestones from this schedule.
    >
    > From our side, I endeavor to ensure our release managers are working 
harder to ping and remind doc liaisons and PTLs to ensure the documentation is 
appropriately updated and working to ensure this does not happen in the future.
    >
    > Thanks,
    >
    > Alex
    
    
    > __________________________________________________________________________
    > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
    > Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
    > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
    

__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Reply via email to