Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [docs] Fuel and Armband merged documentation

2017-10-16 Thread Alexandru Avadanii 
Hi, Ray,
It’s hard to say whether this will continue beyond E release.
Meanwhile, we will keep the docs dir in Armband, like we did in previous 
releases.

BR,
Alex


From: Raymond Paik [mailto:rp...@linuxfoundation.org]
Sent: Monday, October 16, 2017 6:26 AM
To: Alexandru Avadanii
Cc: Sofia Wallin; David McBride; opnfv-tech-discuss; Cristina Pauna; Bob Monkman
Subject: Re: [docs] Fuel and Armband merged documentation

Hi Alex,

I think it makes sense for Armband team to have a separate documentation if you 
are going have support of other installers (e.g. Apex or JOID) in the future

I agree that replicating docs is wasteful, but do you think this would continue 
beyond Euphrates?

Thanks,

Ray

On Sunday, October 15, 2017, Alexandru Avadanii 
> wrote:
Hi,
During the E release cycle, Fuel and Armband projects merged their 
documentation(s).
Currently, the contents of Fuel's 'docs/' dir describe usage for both 
architecture.
To keep the old behavior unchanged, we duplicated that docs dir in Armband for 
now.

Going forward, I think building the same documentation twice is wasteful and 
unnecessary.
How do you think we should proceed in this case?

We can agree that Armband project won't publish any docs going further, and 
just remove the docs dir from our repo.
Or we can add a stub pointing to the Fuel project.

Please let us know what you think.

Thank you,
Alex
___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [docs] Fuel and Armband merged documentation

2017-10-16 Thread Sofia Wallin 
Hi Alex,
I think the best solution is to remove the document links for Armband on 
docs.opnfv.org (or have them linked to Fuel documentation).
But keep the docs directory in your repo if things would change in the future.

//Sofia

From: Raymond Paik 
Date: Monday, 16 October 2017 at 05:26
To: Alexandru Avadanii 
Cc: Sofia Wallin , "dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org" 
, OPNFV , 
Cristina Pauna , Bob Monkman 
Subject: Re: [docs] Fuel and Armband merged documentation

Hi Alex,

I think it makes sense for Armband team to have a separate documentation if you 
are going have support of other installers (e.g. Apex or JOID) in the future

I agree that replicating docs is wasteful, but do you think this would continue 
beyond Euphrates?

Thanks,

Ray

On Sunday, October 15, 2017, Alexandru Avadanii 
> wrote:
Hi,
During the E release cycle, Fuel and Armband projects merged their 
documentation(s).
Currently, the contents of Fuel's 'docs/' dir describe usage for both 
architecture.
To keep the old behavior unchanged, we duplicated that docs dir in Armband for 
now.

Going forward, I think building the same documentation twice is wasteful and 
unnecessary.
How do you think we should proceed in this case?

We can agree that Armband project won't publish any docs going further, and 
just remove the docs dir from our repo.
Or we can add a stub pointing to the Fuel project.

Please let us know what you think.

Thank you,
Alex
___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [docs] Fuel and Armband merged documentation

2017-10-15 Thread Raymond Paik 
Hi Alex,

I think it makes sense for Armband team to have a separate documentation if
you are going have support of other installers (e.g. Apex or JOID) in the
future

I agree that replicating docs is wasteful, but do you think this would
continue beyond Euphrates?

Thanks,

Ray

On Sunday, October 15, 2017, Alexandru Avadanii 
wrote:

> Hi,
> During the E release cycle, Fuel and Armband projects merged their
> documentation(s).
> Currently, the contents of Fuel's 'docs/' dir describe usage for both
> architecture.
> To keep the old behavior unchanged, we duplicated that docs dir in Armband
> for now.
>
> Going forward, I think building the same documentation twice is wasteful
> and unnecessary.
> How do you think we should proceed in this case?
>
> We can agree that Armband project won't publish any docs going further,
> and just remove the docs dir from our repo.
> Or we can add a stub pointing to the Fuel project.
>
> Please let us know what you think.
>
> Thank you,
> Alex
>
___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [docs] Fuel and Armband merged documentation

2017-10-15 Thread Julien 
I prefer to maintain it in installer project. If the affected content can
be documented in installer project properly, it will be easier for
maintainer, developer and end user.

Julien

Alexandru Avadanii 于2017年10月15日周日 下午11:27写道：

> Hi,
> During the E release cycle, Fuel and Armband projects merged their
> documentation(s).
> Currently, the contents of Fuel's 'docs/' dir describe usage for both
> architecture.
> To keep the old behavior unchanged, we duplicated that docs dir in Armband
> for now.
>
> Going forward, I think building the same documentation twice is wasteful
> and unnecessary.
> How do you think we should proceed in this case?
>
> We can agree that Armband project won't publish any docs going further,
> and just remove the docs dir from our repo.
> Or we can add a stub pointing to the Fuel project.
>
> Please let us know what you think.
>
> Thank you,
> Alex
> ___
> opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
> opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
> https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
>
___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

[opnfv-tech-discuss] [docs] Fuel and Armband merged documentation

2017-10-15 Thread Alexandru Avadanii 
Hi,
During the E release cycle, Fuel and Armband projects merged their 
documentation(s).
Currently, the contents of Fuel's 'docs/' dir describe usage for both 
architecture.
To keep the old behavior unchanged, we duplicated that docs dir in Armband for 
now.

Going forward, I think building the same documentation twice is wasteful and 
unnecessary.
How do you think we should proceed in this case?

We can agree that Armband project won't publish any docs going further, and 
just remove the docs dir from our repo.
Or we can add a stub pointing to the Fuel project.

Please let us know what you think.

Thank you,
Alex
___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss