Le 2014-09-08 17:10, Anne Gentle a écrit :
On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 5:27 AM, Steven Hardy <sha...@redhat.com> wrote:

On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 03:56:34PM +1000, Angus Salkeld wrote:
    On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 3:29 PM, Gauvain Pocentek
    <gauvain.pocen...@objectif-libre.com> wrote:

      Hi,

      A bit of background: I'm working on the publication of the HOT resources       reference on docs.openstack.org [1]. This book is mostly autogenerated from       the heat source code, using the sphinx XML output. To avoid publishing       several references (one per released version, as is done for the       OpenStack config-reference), I'd like to add information about the       support status of each resource (when they appeared, when they've been
      deprecated, and so on).

      So the plan is to use the SupportStatus class and its `version`       attribute (see https://review.openstack.org/#/c/116443/ [2] ). And the       question is, what information should the version attribute hold?       Possibilities include the release code name (Icehouse, Juno), or the       release version (2014.1, 2014.2). But this wouldn't be useful for users
      of clouds continuously deployed.

      From my documenter point of view, using the code name seems the right
      option, because it fits with the rest of the documentation.

      What do you think would be the best choice from the heat devs POV?

    IMHO it should match the releases and tags
    (https://github.com/openstack/heat/releases [3]).

+1 this makes sense to me.  Couldn't we have the best of both worlds by having some logic in the docs generation code which maps the milestone to
the release series, so we can say e.g

"Supported since 2014.2.b3 (Juno)"

I agree with the matching of releases, but let's set expectations for
how often it'll be generated. That is to say, each tag is a bit much
to ask. I think that even each milestone is asking a bit much. How
about each release and include the final rc tag (2014.2?)

This option looks good to me.

Gauvain



This would provide sufficient detail to be useful to both folks consuming
the stable releases and those trunk-chasing via CD?

Steve

_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev [4]



Links:
------
[1] http://docs.openstack.org
[2] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/116443/
[3] https://github.com/openstack/heat/releases
[4] http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

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

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

Reply via email to