Re: [Openstack-operators] [OpenStack-docs] [doc] Operations Guide removal
Hey Blair! Thanks for looking into this… Adding Mario and Erik who both also volunteered their time :) 1. I can say confidently that the content that lives at https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Documentation/OpsGuide can be removed. I am happy to do this if you would like to use this URL? 2. We (very successfully) used pandoc during our conversion from XML to RST. I would recommend it. I admit I haven’t tried converting to a mediaWiki format. But hey, worth trying… I guess the other option is manually copying across and editing. (Unless someone has a script lying around?) 3. It’s a good question, one I’m not really sure how to answer. The idea of pushing back to the wiki was so that the operators can own. Having the guide linked from docs.o.o will still ensure there is traffic, and people are able to edit. Perhaps the best idea for this is to use the documentation liaison for Ops as a first point of call? What do you think about that? Currently Robert Starmer is our liaison (https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/CrossProjectLiaisons#Documentation ) but seeing as we’re now making this more of an official ownership thing, we should be revisiting the responsibilities of the ops docs liaison? Cheers, Alex On 7/19/17, 11:40 AM, "Blair Bethwaite" wrote: Hi Alex, I just managed to take a half hour to look at this and have a few questions/comments towards making a plan for how to proceed with moving the Ops Guide content to the wiki... 1) Need to define wiki location and structure. Curiously at the moment there is already meta content at https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Documentation/OpsGuide, Maybe the content could live at https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/OpsGuide? I think it makes sense to follow the existing structure with possible exception of culling wrong / very-out-of-date content (but perhaps anything like that should be done as a later step and keep it simple aiming for a "like-for-like" migration to start with)...? 2) Getting the content into the wiki. Looks like there is no obvious up-to-date RST import functionality for MediaWiki. Pandoc seems as though it might support some useful conversions but I didn't try this yet and don't have any experience with it - can anyone say with authority whether it is worth pursuing? 3) Future management - obvious can of worms given this is much better addressed by all the tooling and scaffolding the docs team already provides around the repos... but nonetheless some expectations may need to be set upfront to avoid future pain. Cheers, On 15 July 2017 at 01:48, Alexandra Settle wrote: > Hi operators, > > Please be aware that I have proposed the following patch: > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/483937/ > > > > This removes the Operations Guide from the openstack-manuals repo and will > no longer be accessible via docs.openstack.org after the patch merges. > > The documentation team does not have the resources to move the ops guide to > the wiki ourselves. If you are able to work on the migration, please check > out the ‘before-migration’ tag in the repo to access the deleted content. > [0] > > Once the ops guide is migrated to the wiki, we will help you add a redirect > so that the old link on docs.openstack.org will allow users to find the > content in the new location. > > Thanks, > > Alex > > > > [0] https://github.com/openstack/openstack-manuals/tree/before-migration > > > ___ > OpenStack-docs mailing list > openstack-d...@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-docs > -- Cheers, ~Blairo ___ OpenStack-operators mailing list OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
Re: [Openstack-operators] [doc] Operations Guide removal
Please forgive my naivete here - I am quite new to OpenStack and as such to the community. I have found that in this project as well as in others, old documentation .. can be surprisingly useful, especially when marked with a date or version. We completely agree with you here, which is why we are attempting to give this document back to the operations community. This does, however, mean a small amount of downtime. I recognise that volunteer time is limited, and am interested to see how the new ideas for documentation will go. At the same time, significantly reduced access to documentation - yes, even outdated, orphaned documentation - will make life more difficult for this new operator. If the decision is fixed and there is no will to avoid an outage in this manner, then I guess that is about all I can say. We also completely agree with you here too. However, one of the many discussions that has continuously come up on ML and during summit and design conference sessions is that our operators find it difficult to contribute to the documentation as is. Our method of treating documentation like code does not suit all, so this is in part an attempt to solve that problem. This does mean that along the way, we are going to have some downtime. But the end goal is to allow our operators to access documentation to be able to update more easily and frequently – hopefully to help future, new, operators like yourself. The decision has been made, per say. But we hope that this new solution will prove to be fruitful :) I will say a word of thanks to you and all of the contributors to the documentation so far. It is critical to anyone starting to use such a massive set of software. I hope that the migration to wiki arrangements is smooth and successful. So far, so good! Thanks for your note, Greg :) please reach out with any concerns or questions you may have. I’m on IRC as “asettle” or easily contactable via email if that suits you best :) ___ OpenStack-operators mailing list OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators ___ OpenStack-operators mailing list OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
Re: [Openstack-operators] [doc] Operations Guide removal
Hi Greg, We have been working to fulfil the implementation process that is outlined in the migration spec[0] I have been emailing the ops list calling for volunteers to help migrate the operations guide over to the OpenStack wiki. I have had a volunteer, but he is currently on vacation. Perhaps this is to what you are referring to? As Andreas noted, any documentation can always be accessed using the before-migration tag in the openstack-manuals repo.[1] If perhaps you are referring to another document, it would be helpful if you could find the relevant materials :) Hopefully this helps, Alex [0] http://specs.openstack.org/openstack/docs-specs/specs/pike/os-manuals-migration.html [1] https://github.com/openstack/openstack-manuals/tree/before-migration On 7/17/17, 3:39 AM, "Gregory Orange" wrote: On 14/07/17 23:48, Alexandra Settle wrote: > Please be aware that I have proposed the following patch: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/483937/ > > This removes the Operations Guide from the openstack-manuals repo and will no longer be accessible via docs.openstack.org after the patch merges. I am unclear on the order of events here. Recently we found some documentation[1] had been removed because it was going to be put up somewhere else, but was not yet available. Is this the case here? Could it instead be put up somewhere else shortly *before* removing it from the repo? Regards, Greg. [1] I do not recall which, but I can find out if desired ___ OpenStack-operators mailing list OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators ___ OpenStack-operators mailing list OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
[Openstack-operators] [doc] Operations Guide removal
Hi operators, Please be aware that I have proposed the following patch: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/483937/ This removes the Operations Guide from the openstack-manuals repo and will no longer be accessible via docs.openstack.org after the patch merges. The documentation team does not have the resources to move the ops guide to the wiki ourselves. If you are able to work on the migration, please check out the ‘before-migration’ tag in the repo to access the deleted content. [0] Once the ops guide is migrated to the wiki, we will help you add a redirect so that the old link on docs.openstack.org will allow users to find the content in the new location. Thanks, Alex [0] https://github.com/openstack/openstack-manuals/tree/before-migration ___ OpenStack-operators mailing list OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
Re: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev][doc[ptls] Doc meeting
Hi everyone, If you have any questions/concerns/comments/feelings you have about the doc migration, bring ‘em to #openstack-meeting at 1600UTC today :) I’ll be there to chat instead of our regularly scheduled meeting :) Cheers, Alex From: Alexandra Settle Date: Wednesday, June 28, 2017 at 6:45 PM To: "'openstack-d...@lists.openstack.org'" , "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" Cc: "openstack-operators@lists.openstack.org" Subject: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev][doc[ptls] Doc meeting Hey everyone, The docs meeting will continue in #openstack-meeting as scheduled (Thursday, 29th of June at 16:00 UTC). There will be no official agenda, I am opening up this meeting for any docs liaisons and PTLs to come and chat about the docs migration and any questions they may have. The meeting chair will be me! Hope you can all make it ☺ Thanks, Alex ___ OpenStack-operators mailing list OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
[Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev][doc[ptls] Doc meeting
Hey everyone, The docs meeting will continue in #openstack-meeting as scheduled (Thursday, 29th of June at 16:00 UTC). There will be no official agenda, I am opening up this meeting for any docs liaisons and PTLs to come and chat about the docs migration and any questions they may have. The meeting chair will be me! Hope you can all make it ☺ Thanks, Alex ___ OpenStack-operators mailing list OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
Re: [Openstack-operators] [OpenStack-docs] [dev][doc] Operations Guide future
Hi Mario, Just so everyone is aware that you’re offering assistance, I’ve re-added the ML back in. Definitely appreciate the help! The only schedule is that it is delivered by the Pike release. You can see the details and dates here: https://releases.openstack.org/pike/schedule.html Thank you again! Anyone else able to help Mario? Cheers, Alex From: Mario Pranjic Date: Wednesday, June 28, 2017 at 7:32 AM To: Alexandra Settle Subject: Re: [OpenStack-docs] [Openstack-operators][dev][doc] Operations Guide future Hi, I can help with wiki. It depends what are the schedules? I am on vacation with sometimes limited access to machine with net. If it's not on a tight schedule day to day basis, count me in. Mario Pranjic, M.Sc.C.S, RHCSA, RHCE t: +47 454 90 613 e: ma...@pranjic.no<mailto:ma...@pranjic.no> skype: mario.pranjic.no LinkedIn: https://no.linkedin.com/in/mariopranjic On 06/27/2017 05:52 PM, Alexandra Settle wrote: Thanks everyone for your feedback regarding the proposal below. Going forwards we are going to implement Option 3. If anyone is able to help out with this migration, please let me know :) Looking forward to getting started! From: Alexandra Settle <mailto:a.set...@outlook.com> Date: Thursday, June 1, 2017 at 4:06 PM To: OpenStack Operators <mailto:openstack-operators@lists.openstack.org>, "'openstack-d...@lists.openstack.org'" <mailto:openstack-d...@lists.openstack.org> Cc: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" <mailto:openstack-...@lists.openstack.org> Subject: [Openstack-operators] [dev] [doc] Operations Guide future Hi everyone, I haven’t had any feedback regarding moving the Operations Guide to the OpenStack wiki. I’m not taking silence as compliance. I would really like to hear people’s opinions on this matter. To recap: 1. Option one: Kill the Operations Guide completely and move the Administration Guide to project repos. 2. Option two: Combine the Operations and Administration Guides (and then this will be moved into the project-specific repos) 3. Option three: Move Operations Guide to OpenStack wiki (for ease of operator-specific maintainability) and move the Administration Guide to project repos. Personally, I think that option 3 is more realistic. The idea for the last option is that operators are maintaining operator-specific documentation and updating it as they go along and we’re not losing anything by combining or deleting. I don’t want to lose what we have by going with option 1, and I think option 2 is just a workaround without fixing the problem – we are not getting contributions to the project. Thoughts? Alex From: Alexandra Settle <mailto:a.set...@outlook.com> Date: Friday, May 19, 2017 at 1:38 PM To: Melvin Hillsman <mailto:mrhills...@gmail.com>, OpenStack Operators <mailto:openstack-operators@lists.openstack.org> Subject: Re: [Openstack-operators] Fwd: [openstack-dev] [openstack-doc] [dev] What's up doc? Summit recap edition Hi everyone, Adding to this, I would like to draw your attention to the last dot point of my email: “One of the key takeaways from the summit was the session that I joint moderated with Melvin Hillsman regarding the Operations and Administration Guides. You can find the etherpad with notes here: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/admin-ops-guides The session was really helpful – we were able to discuss with the operators present the current situation of the documentation team, and how they could help us maintain the two guides, aimed at the same audience. The operator’s present at the session agreed that the Administration Guide was important, and could be maintained upstream. However, they voted and agreed that the best course of action for the Operations Guide was for it to be pulled down and put into a wiki that the operators could manage themselves. We will be looking at actioning this item as soon as possible.” I would like to go ahead with this, but I would appreciate feedback from operators who were not able to attend the summit. In the etherpad you will see the three options that the operators in the room recommended as being viable, and the voted option being moving the Operations Guide out of docs.openstack.org into a wiki. The aim of this was to empower the operations community to take more control of the updates in an environment they are more familiar with (and available to others). What does everyone think of the proposed options? Questions? Other thoughts? Alex From: Melvin Hillsman <mailto:mrhills...@gmail.com> Date: Friday, May 19, 2017 at 1:30 PM To: OpenStack Operators <mailto:openstack-operators@lists.openstack.org> Subject: [Openstack-operators] Fwd: [openstack-dev] [openstack-doc] [dev] What's up doc? Summit recap edition -- Forwarded message -- From: Alexandra Settle mailto:a.set...@outlook.com&
[Openstack-operators] [dev][doc] Operations Guide future
Thanks everyone for your feedback regarding the proposal below. Going forwards we are going to implement Option 3. If anyone is able to help out with this migration, please let me know :) Looking forward to getting started! From: Alexandra Settle Date: Thursday, June 1, 2017 at 4:06 PM To: OpenStack Operators , "'openstack-d...@lists.openstack.org'" Cc: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" Subject: [Openstack-operators] [dev] [doc] Operations Guide future Hi everyone, I haven’t had any feedback regarding moving the Operations Guide to the OpenStack wiki. I’m not taking silence as compliance. I would really like to hear people’s opinions on this matter. To recap: 1. Option one: Kill the Operations Guide completely and move the Administration Guide to project repos. 2. Option two: Combine the Operations and Administration Guides (and then this will be moved into the project-specific repos) 3. Option three: Move Operations Guide to OpenStack wiki (for ease of operator-specific maintainability) and move the Administration Guide to project repos. Personally, I think that option 3 is more realistic. The idea for the last option is that operators are maintaining operator-specific documentation and updating it as they go along and we’re not losing anything by combining or deleting. I don’t want to lose what we have by going with option 1, and I think option 2 is just a workaround without fixing the problem – we are not getting contributions to the project. Thoughts? Alex From: Alexandra Settle Date: Friday, May 19, 2017 at 1:38 PM To: Melvin Hillsman , OpenStack Operators Subject: Re: [Openstack-operators] Fwd: [openstack-dev] [openstack-doc] [dev] What's up doc? Summit recap edition Hi everyone, Adding to this, I would like to draw your attention to the last dot point of my email: “One of the key takeaways from the summit was the session that I joint moderated with Melvin Hillsman regarding the Operations and Administration Guides. You can find the etherpad with notes here: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/admin-ops-guides The session was really helpful – we were able to discuss with the operators present the current situation of the documentation team, and how they could help us maintain the two guides, aimed at the same audience. The operator’s present at the session agreed that the Administration Guide was important, and could be maintained upstream. However, they voted and agreed that the best course of action for the Operations Guide was for it to be pulled down and put into a wiki that the operators could manage themselves. We will be looking at actioning this item as soon as possible.” I would like to go ahead with this, but I would appreciate feedback from operators who were not able to attend the summit. In the etherpad you will see the three options that the operators in the room recommended as being viable, and the voted option being moving the Operations Guide out of docs.openstack.org into a wiki. The aim of this was to empower the operations community to take more control of the updates in an environment they are more familiar with (and available to others). What does everyone think of the proposed options? Questions? Other thoughts? Alex From: Melvin Hillsman Date: Friday, May 19, 2017 at 1:30 PM To: OpenStack Operators Subject: [Openstack-operators] Fwd: [openstack-dev] [openstack-doc] [dev] What's up doc? Summit recap edition -- Forwarded message -- From: Alexandra Settle mailto:a.set...@outlook.com>> Date: Fri, May 19, 2017 at 6:12 AM Subject: [openstack-dev] [openstack-doc] [dev] What's up doc? Summit recap edition To: "openstack-d...@lists.openstack.org<mailto:openstack-d...@lists.openstack.org>" mailto:openstack-d...@lists.openstack.org>> Cc: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" mailto:openstack-...@lists.openstack.org>> Hi everyone, The OpenStack manuals project had a really productive week at the OpenStack summit in Boston. You can find a list of all the etherpads and attendees here: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/docs-summit As we all know, we are rapidly losing key contributors and core reviewers. We are not alone, this is happening across the board. It is making things harder, but not impossible. Since our inception in 2010, we’ve been climbing higher and higher trying to achieve the best documentation we could, and uphold our high standards. This is something to be incredibly proud of. However, we now need to take a step back and realise that the amount of work we are attempting to maintain is now out of reach for the team size that we have. At the moment we have 13 cores, of which none are full time contributors or reviewers. This includes myself. That being said! I have spent the last week at the summit talking to some of our lea
Re: [Openstack-operators] [dev] [doc] Operations Guide future
Hey Blair, Thanks ( I appreciate your offer of assistance. We are in full swing at the moment. The spec is very close to being merged. You can view that here: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/472275/ I am still looking for someone who can help us out with the pandoc conversion. I am happy to go through it with said individual. Cheers, Alex On 6/23/17, 3:47 AM, "Blair Bethwaite" wrote: Hi Alex, On 2 June 2017 at 23:13, Alexandra Settle wrote: > O I like your thinking – I’m a pandoc fan, so, I’d be interested in > moving this along using any tools to make it easier. I can't realistically offer much time on this but I would be happy to help (ad-hoc) review/catalog/clean-up issues with export. > I think my only proviso (now I’m thinking about it more) is that we still > have a link on docs.o.o, but it goes to the wiki page for the Ops Guide. Agreed, need to maintain discoverability. -- Cheers, ~Blairo ___ OpenStack-operators mailing list OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
Re: [Openstack-operators] [dev] [doc] Operations Guide future
O I like your thinking – I’m a pandoc fan, so, I’d be interested in moving this along using any tools to make it easier. I think my only proviso (now I’m thinking about it more) is that we still have a link on docs.o.o, but it goes to the wiki page for the Ops Guide. From: Anne Gentle Date: Friday, June 2, 2017 at 1:53 PM To: Alexandra Settle Cc: Blair Bethwaite , OpenStack Operators , "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" , "openstack-d...@lists.openstack.org" Subject: Re: [Openstack-operators] [dev] [doc] Operations Guide future I'm okay with option 3. Since we hadn't heard from anyone yet who can do the work, I thought I'd describe a super small experiment to try. If you're interested in the export, run an experiment with Pandoc to convert from RST to Mediawiki. http://pandoc.org/demos.html You'll likely still have cleanup but it's a start. Only convert troubleshooting to start, which gets the most hits: docs.openstack.org/<http://docs.openstack.org/>ops-guide/ops-network-troubleshooting.html Then see how much you get from Pandoc. Let us know how it goes, I'm curious! Anne On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 4:03 AM, Alexandra Settle mailto:a.set...@outlook.com>> wrote: Blair – correct, it was the majority in the room. I just wanted to reach out and ensure that operators had a chance to voice opinions and see where we were going ( Sounds like option 3 is still the favorable direction. This is going to be a really big exercise, lifting the content out of the repos. Are people able to help? Thanks everyone for getting on board ( On 6/2/17, 2:44 AM, "Blair Bethwaite" mailto:blair.bethwa...@gmail.com>> wrote: Hi Alex, Likewise for option 3. If I recall correctly from the summit session that was also the main preference in the room? On 2 June 2017 at 11:15, George Mihaiescu mailto:lmihaie...@gmail.com>> wrote: > +1 for option 3 > > > > On Jun 1, 2017, at 11:06, Alexandra Settle mailto:a.set...@outlook.com>> wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > > > I haven’t had any feedback regarding moving the Operations Guide to the > OpenStack wiki. I’m not taking silence as compliance. I would really like to > hear people’s opinions on this matter. > > > > To recap: > > > > Option one: Kill the Operations Guide completely and move the Administration > Guide to project repos. > Option two: Combine the Operations and Administration Guides (and then this > will be moved into the project-specific repos) > Option three: Move Operations Guide to OpenStack wiki (for ease of > operator-specific maintainability) and move the Administration Guide to > project repos. > > > > Personally, I think that option 3 is more realistic. The idea for the last > option is that operators are maintaining operator-specific documentation and > updating it as they go along and we’re not losing anything by combining or > deleting. I don’t want to lose what we have by going with option 1, and I > think option 2 is just a workaround without fixing the problem – we are not > getting contributions to the project. > > > > Thoughts? > > > > Alex > > > > From: Alexandra Settle mailto:a.set...@outlook.com>> > Date: Friday, May 19, 2017 at 1:38 PM > To: Melvin Hillsman mailto:mrhills...@gmail.com>>, OpenStack Operators > mailto:openstack-operators@lists.openstack.org>> > Subject: Re: [Openstack-operators] Fwd: [openstack-dev] [openstack-doc] > [dev] What's up doc? Summit recap edition > > > > Hi everyone, > > > > Adding to this, I would like to draw your attention to the last dot point of > my email: > > > > “One of the key takeaways from the summit was the session that I joint > moderated with Melvin Hillsman regarding the Operations and Administration > Guides. You can find the etherpad with notes here: > https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/admin-ops-guides The session was really > helpful – we were able to discuss with the operators present the current > situation of the documentation team, and how they could help us maintain the > two guides, aimed at the same audience. The operator’s present at the > session agreed that the Administration Guide was important, and could be > maintained upstream. However, they voted and agreed that the best course of > action for the Operations Guide was for it to be pulled down and put into a > wiki that the operato
Re: [Openstack-operators] [dev] [doc] Operations Guide future
Blair – correct, it was the majority in the room. I just wanted to reach out and ensure that operators had a chance to voice opinions and see where we were going ( Sounds like option 3 is still the favorable direction. This is going to be a really big exercise, lifting the content out of the repos. Are people able to help? Thanks everyone for getting on board ( On 6/2/17, 2:44 AM, "Blair Bethwaite" wrote: Hi Alex, Likewise for option 3. If I recall correctly from the summit session that was also the main preference in the room? On 2 June 2017 at 11:15, George Mihaiescu wrote: > +1 for option 3 > > > > On Jun 1, 2017, at 11:06, Alexandra Settle wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > > > I haven’t had any feedback regarding moving the Operations Guide to the > OpenStack wiki. I’m not taking silence as compliance. I would really like to > hear people’s opinions on this matter. > > > > To recap: > > > > Option one: Kill the Operations Guide completely and move the Administration > Guide to project repos. > Option two: Combine the Operations and Administration Guides (and then this > will be moved into the project-specific repos) > Option three: Move Operations Guide to OpenStack wiki (for ease of > operator-specific maintainability) and move the Administration Guide to > project repos. > > > > Personally, I think that option 3 is more realistic. The idea for the last > option is that operators are maintaining operator-specific documentation and > updating it as they go along and we’re not losing anything by combining or > deleting. I don’t want to lose what we have by going with option 1, and I > think option 2 is just a workaround without fixing the problem – we are not > getting contributions to the project. > > > > Thoughts? > > > > Alex > > > > From: Alexandra Settle > Date: Friday, May 19, 2017 at 1:38 PM > To: Melvin Hillsman , OpenStack Operators > > Subject: Re: [Openstack-operators] Fwd: [openstack-dev] [openstack-doc] > [dev] What's up doc? Summit recap edition > > > > Hi everyone, > > > > Adding to this, I would like to draw your attention to the last dot point of > my email: > > > > “One of the key takeaways from the summit was the session that I joint > moderated with Melvin Hillsman regarding the Operations and Administration > Guides. You can find the etherpad with notes here: > https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/admin-ops-guides The session was really > helpful – we were able to discuss with the operators present the current > situation of the documentation team, and how they could help us maintain the > two guides, aimed at the same audience. The operator’s present at the > session agreed that the Administration Guide was important, and could be > maintained upstream. However, they voted and agreed that the best course of > action for the Operations Guide was for it to be pulled down and put into a > wiki that the operators could manage themselves. We will be looking at > actioning this item as soon as possible.” > > > > I would like to go ahead with this, but I would appreciate feedback from > operators who were not able to attend the summit. In the etherpad you will > see the three options that the operators in the room recommended as being > viable, and the voted option being moving the Operations Guide out of > docs.openstack.org into a wiki. The aim of this was to empower the > operations community to take more control of the updates in an environment > they are more familiar with (and available to others). > > > > What does everyone think of the proposed options? Questions? Other thoughts? > > > > Alex > > > > From: Melvin Hillsman > Date: Friday, May 19, 2017 at 1:30 PM > To: OpenStack Operators > Subject: [Openstack-operators] Fwd: [openstack-dev] [openstack-doc] [dev] > What's up doc? Summit recap edition > > > > > > -- Forwarded message -- > From: Alexandra Settle > Date: Fri, May 19, 2017 at 6:12 AM > Subject: [openstack-dev] [openstack-doc] [dev] What's up doc? Summit recap > edition > To: "openstack-d...@lists.openstack.org" > > Cc: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage ques
[Openstack-operators] [dev] [doc] Operations Guide future
Hi everyone, I haven’t had any feedback regarding moving the Operations Guide to the OpenStack wiki. I’m not taking silence as compliance. I would really like to hear people’s opinions on this matter. To recap: 1. Option one: Kill the Operations Guide completely and move the Administration Guide to project repos. 2. Option two: Combine the Operations and Administration Guides (and then this will be moved into the project-specific repos) 3. Option three: Move Operations Guide to OpenStack wiki (for ease of operator-specific maintainability) and move the Administration Guide to project repos. Personally, I think that option 3 is more realistic. The idea for the last option is that operators are maintaining operator-specific documentation and updating it as they go along and we’re not losing anything by combining or deleting. I don’t want to lose what we have by going with option 1, and I think option 2 is just a workaround without fixing the problem – we are not getting contributions to the project. Thoughts? Alex From: Alexandra Settle Date: Friday, May 19, 2017 at 1:38 PM To: Melvin Hillsman , OpenStack Operators Subject: Re: [Openstack-operators] Fwd: [openstack-dev] [openstack-doc] [dev] What's up doc? Summit recap edition Hi everyone, Adding to this, I would like to draw your attention to the last dot point of my email: “One of the key takeaways from the summit was the session that I joint moderated with Melvin Hillsman regarding the Operations and Administration Guides. You can find the etherpad with notes here: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/admin-ops-guides The session was really helpful – we were able to discuss with the operators present the current situation of the documentation team, and how they could help us maintain the two guides, aimed at the same audience. The operator’s present at the session agreed that the Administration Guide was important, and could be maintained upstream. However, they voted and agreed that the best course of action for the Operations Guide was for it to be pulled down and put into a wiki that the operators could manage themselves. We will be looking at actioning this item as soon as possible.” I would like to go ahead with this, but I would appreciate feedback from operators who were not able to attend the summit. In the etherpad you will see the three options that the operators in the room recommended as being viable, and the voted option being moving the Operations Guide out of docs.openstack.org into a wiki. The aim of this was to empower the operations community to take more control of the updates in an environment they are more familiar with (and available to others). What does everyone think of the proposed options? Questions? Other thoughts? Alex From: Melvin Hillsman Date: Friday, May 19, 2017 at 1:30 PM To: OpenStack Operators Subject: [Openstack-operators] Fwd: [openstack-dev] [openstack-doc] [dev] What's up doc? Summit recap edition -- Forwarded message ------ From: Alexandra Settle mailto:a.set...@outlook.com>> Date: Fri, May 19, 2017 at 6:12 AM Subject: [openstack-dev] [openstack-doc] [dev] What's up doc? Summit recap edition To: "openstack-d...@lists.openstack.org<mailto:openstack-d...@lists.openstack.org>" mailto:openstack-d...@lists.openstack.org>> Cc: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" mailto:openstack-...@lists.openstack.org>> Hi everyone, The OpenStack manuals project had a really productive week at the OpenStack summit in Boston. You can find a list of all the etherpads and attendees here: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/docs-summit As we all know, we are rapidly losing key contributors and core reviewers. We are not alone, this is happening across the board. It is making things harder, but not impossible. Since our inception in 2010, we’ve been climbing higher and higher trying to achieve the best documentation we could, and uphold our high standards. This is something to be incredibly proud of. However, we now need to take a step back and realise that the amount of work we are attempting to maintain is now out of reach for the team size that we have. At the moment we have 13 cores, of which none are full time contributors or reviewers. This includes myself. That being said! I have spent the last week at the summit talking to some of our leaders, including Doug Hellmann (cc’d), Jonathan Bryce and Mike Perez regarding the future of the project. Between myself and other community members, we have been drafting plans and coming up with a new direction that will hopefully be sustainable in the long-term. I am interested to hear your thoughts. I want to make sure that everyone feels that we’re headed in the right direction first and foremost. All of these action items are documented in this WIP etherpad: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/doc-planning Some furth
Re: [Openstack-operators] Fwd: [openstack-dev] [openstack-doc] [dev] What's up doc? Summit recap edition
Hi everyone, Adding to this, I would like to draw your attention to the last dot point of my email: “One of the key takeaways from the summit was the session that I joint moderated with Melvin Hillsman regarding the Operations and Administration Guides. You can find the etherpad with notes here: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/admin-ops-guides The session was really helpful – we were able to discuss with the operators present the current situation of the documentation team, and how they could help us maintain the two guides, aimed at the same audience. The operator’s present at the session agreed that the Administration Guide was important, and could be maintained upstream. However, they voted and agreed that the best course of action for the Operations Guide was for it to be pulled down and put into a wiki that the operators could manage themselves. We will be looking at actioning this item as soon as possible.” I would like to go ahead with this, but I would appreciate feedback from operators who were not able to attend the summit. In the etherpad you will see the three options that the operators in the room recommended as being viable, and the voted option being moving the Operations Guide out of docs.openstack.org into a wiki. The aim of this was to empower the operations community to take more control of the updates in an environment they are more familiar with (and available to others). What does everyone think of the proposed options? Questions? Other thoughts? Alex From: Melvin Hillsman Date: Friday, May 19, 2017 at 1:30 PM To: OpenStack Operators Subject: [Openstack-operators] Fwd: [openstack-dev] [openstack-doc] [dev] What's up doc? Summit recap edition -- Forwarded message -- From: Alexandra Settle mailto:a.set...@outlook.com>> Date: Fri, May 19, 2017 at 6:12 AM Subject: [openstack-dev] [openstack-doc] [dev] What's up doc? Summit recap edition To: "openstack-d...@lists.openstack.org<mailto:openstack-d...@lists.openstack.org>" mailto:openstack-d...@lists.openstack.org>> Cc: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" mailto:openstack-...@lists.openstack.org>> Hi everyone, The OpenStack manuals project had a really productive week at the OpenStack summit in Boston. You can find a list of all the etherpads and attendees here: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/docs-summit As we all know, we are rapidly losing key contributors and core reviewers. We are not alone, this is happening across the board. It is making things harder, but not impossible. Since our inception in 2010, we’ve been climbing higher and higher trying to achieve the best documentation we could, and uphold our high standards. This is something to be incredibly proud of. However, we now need to take a step back and realise that the amount of work we are attempting to maintain is now out of reach for the team size that we have. At the moment we have 13 cores, of which none are full time contributors or reviewers. This includes myself. That being said! I have spent the last week at the summit talking to some of our leaders, including Doug Hellmann (cc’d), Jonathan Bryce and Mike Perez regarding the future of the project. Between myself and other community members, we have been drafting plans and coming up with a new direction that will hopefully be sustainable in the long-term. I am interested to hear your thoughts. I want to make sure that everyone feels that we’re headed in the right direction first and foremost. All of these action items are documented in this WIP etherpad: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/doc-planning Some further highlights from the event… • The documentation team was represented by myself, Olga, and Alex Adamov for the Project Update: Documentation on the Monday. If you’d like to catch up with what we talked about, the video is available online now: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jcfbKxbpRvc The translation team PTL, Ian Choi, also had a session about getting more involved with the I18N team. You can view that video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ybFI4nez_Z8 • Ian and I also hosted the joint I18N and documentation onboarding session. We were visited by some friendly faces, and some new ones. Between Ian and myself, we discussed the documentation and translation workflows, and how to get involved (the mailing list, IRC channel, etc). Which was lots of fun :) we’d love to see more people there in the future, hopefully we’ll slowly get there! • This week I was focusing heavily on making the community aware that the documentation team was struggling to maintain contributors, but continuing with the same amount of work. This was a heavy conversation to be having, but it posed some really interesting questions to key leaders, and hopefully raised appropriate concerns. Ildiko and I hosted “OpenStack documentation: The future
Re: [Openstack-operators] Error in making connection Openstack Python SDK
Hi Amit, I have CC’d Andy McCrae, the OpenStack-Ansible PTL. For all OpenStack-Ansible related queries, I would recommend tagging the subject line with [openstack-anisble] to help those with filters :) Either that, or potentially ask your question in the IRC channel #openstack-ansible Cheers, Alex From: Amit Kumar Date: Thursday, March 2, 2017 at 11:01 AM To: Openstack , OpenStack Operators Subject: [Openstack-operators] Error in making connection Openstack Python SDK Hi All, I have deployed Openstack using Openstack-Ansible. I am using Newton release from tag 14.0.8. My test environment is containing only Compute Node and Controller Node (Infra Node). When using Openstack Python SDK, I am getting following error while making connection to external_vib_lp_address (192.168.255.45) binded to port 5000. openstack.exceptions.SDKException: Connection failure that may be retried. Any clue about this issue? More detailed traces are at: http://paste.openstack.org/show/601053/ Python script which I am using for this purpose is attached with this e-mail. Thanks. Regards, Amit ___ OpenStack-operators mailing list OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
