> > 2) Driver docs may not be backported to stable branches. This is a > stable maintenance policy, not an Ironic policy. This problem is > somewhat unique to Ironic as most major projects have deployer docs in > the Ops guide repo, rather than in the code repo. I'm going to chat with > some docs/stable maintenance people in Tokyo about this, however I also > encourage you to do the same. > > I think the issue of updating documentation on stable branches goes beyond driver docs. I question whether we should be bundling the release-related documentation with the code if it is near impossible to update that documentation after a branch is created. For example, we have links to release-related documentation, but they aren't correct. We released 4.2.1 (on stable/liberty branch), and the release notes there [0] don't show release information for 4.2.1. You have to go to master [1] to see it :-(
How do the other projects do it (correctly), or is ironic the only one so far that has in-tree documentation? It seems that after a stable branch is cut for (some) projects, the docs team has 1 month or so beyond that to get the documentation out. It would be great if the docs we currently maintain in-tree could follow a similar schedule. (And how does the doc team deal with updates to documentation for prior releases?) --ruby [0] http://docs.openstack.org/developer/ironic/4.2.1/releasenotes/index.html [1] http://docs.openstack.org/developer/ironic/releasenotes/index.html
__________________________________________________________________________ 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
