[Openstack-operators] [dev][doc] Operations Guide future

[Alexandra Settle]

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 <a.set...@outlook.com>
Date: Thursday, June 1, 2017 at 4:06 PM
To: OpenStack Operators <openstack-operators@lists.openstack.org>, 
"'openstack-d...@lists.openstack.org'" <openstack-d...@lists.openstack.org>
Cc: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" 
<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 <a.set...@outlook.com>
Date: Friday, May 19, 2017 at 1:38 PM
To: Melvin Hillsman <mrhills...@gmail.com>, OpenStack Operators 
<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 <mrhills...@gmail.com>
Date: Friday, May 19, 2017 at 1:30 PM
To: OpenStack Operators <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 <a.set...@outlook.com<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>" 
<openstack-d...@lists.openstack.org<mailto:openstack-d...@lists.openstack.org>>
Cc: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" 
<openstack-...@lists.openstack.org<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

Re: [Openstack-operators] [dev] [doc] Operations Guide future

[Alexandra Settle]

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

[Blair Bethwaite]

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

[Alexandra Settle]

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 questions)"
> 
>
>
> Hi everyone,
>
>
> The OpenStack 

Re: [Openstack-operators] [dev] [doc] Operations Guide future

[Blair Bethwaite]

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 questions)"
> 
>
>
> 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 

Re: [Openstack-operators] [dev] [doc] Operations Guide future

[Doug Thompson]

Hi Alexandra,   I have always been in favour of having operations guides 
separate from an administration guide although there needs to be a lot of cross 
reference.
   IMHO, operations guides should have commands and instructions on how to 
diagnose and remedy issues of a running installation.  Administration guides 
should have lots of detail on configuration and how to implement features.
On Thu, 2017-06-01 at 15:06 +, 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 questions)" 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 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