14:05:14 #startmeeting docteam 14:05:15 Meeting started Wed May 21 14:05:14 2014 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is annegentle_. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 14:05:16 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 14:05:18 The meeting name has been set to 'docteam' 14:05:22 Agenda is here: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/DocTeamMeeting#Agenda_for_next_meeting 14:06:13 Let's see, action items 14:06:17 #Action items from last meeting 14:06:42 none! 14:06:44 score 14:06:53 Let's report from the summit 14:06:57 i think we had a few meetings last week :) 14:06:57 #topic Summit reports 14:07:06 #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Summit/Juno/Etherpads#Documentation 14:07:42 as you all know, the etherpads are the record from the Summit. I did add based on my memory at the end of the week and then used the etherpads to make the roadmaps I proposed yesterday 14:07:51 #topic Summary of cross project documentation discussions 14:08:00 I sensed that devs are very happy to hand over doc tasks to real writers 14:08:05 we got some good input there 14:08:17 for the requirements, much of the sentiment was "don't fix what isn't broken" 14:08:26 I'll keep poking on that a bit but we didn't come up with sweeping changes 14:08:28 annegentle_, the content of the roadmaps is great, thanks! 14:08:37 just some lateral movement as we see fit 14:08:55 You can follow one of the ideas there with the user guide/orchestration inclusion thread on the mailing list 14:09:28 One task we need to assign/capture is the creation of a template for the commit messages, it can just go on the wiki I believe. 14:09:45 that was a great suggestion from a dev in the "making docs easier for devs" session -- she hadn't heard of DocImpact 14:09:55 #topic Install Guide decisions 14:10:08 yay install guide 14:10:13 those are captured in the etherpad, in the wiki spec linked from the blueprint, and somewhat in the road map 14:10:20 lol 14:10:22 the blueprint is the place to review all that 14:10:37 #topic Doc process - review guide, docs guide 14:11:01 My sense of the decisions from that are that the review guide will start on the wiki with Sam-I-Am filling in the outline started there 14:11:05 but we need to talk about the docs guide 14:11:20 I'd prefer it be not-built, what are your thoughts AJaeger? 14:11:45 there's a separate wiki for the review guide... i'll probably copy it over to the doc guide wiki as a section 14:12:10 annegentle_, I'd like something that I can easily refer with links to from a review comment - and that works best from a built manual 14:12:14 unless you want me to keep it separate and reference itr 14:12:42 what's the argument for having it in a book, rather than just on the wiki? 14:12:51 Sam-I-Am: keep the review guide in the wiki for this release 14:12:54 wiki satisfies both requirements (not built, and able to be linked) 14:13:16 loquacities: partially the length of the wiki page was intimidating to devs 14:13:16 loquacities, we need to rework the complete content, it's not good structured anymore. 14:13:30 heh, muphry 14:13:43 loquacities, yes, we can keep it in the wiki and rework everything as well. 14:13:50 ok, i think proposing an overhaul is probably a better course of action, then 14:14:01 Another good thing was the review of having it in guide - allows proper signup of changes 14:14:12 wikis just arent laid out well for long documents 14:14:14 really I just suggested a move into the repo since it's quite long and complex 14:14:15 hard to find stuff 14:14:28 and the repo may be where people start rather than the wiki 14:14:35 we also have the guide Diane wrote 14:14:42 plus it'll take on a format similar to the other books 14:14:52 I would merge Diane's guide and what we discussed... 14:14:52 I'm just thinking it's "conventions.rst" for style/conventions 14:15:12 rather than docbook? 14:15:16 RST is difficult to include graphics in it - and a nice graph might do wonder 14:15:28 it's a guide, though, it shouldn't be laid out like a lengthy book 14:15:37 so, docbook would work for me. 14:15:37 AJaeger: where's that review? I can't find the link tho 14:15:47 if it's hard to navigate, we need to rethink the way the content is presented 14:16:04 loquacities: i like the navigation bar on the left for the books 14:16:08 https://review.openstack.org/93963 14:16:13 loquacities: for example, we publish http://docs.rackspace.com/writers-guide/content/ch_wadl.html 14:16:23 loquacities: it has lots of indepth training for new writers 14:16:44 i didn't even know it existed until this afternoon, quite honestly 14:16:49 #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/openstack-manuals/+spec/docs-guide 14:16:56 #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Documentation/DocumentationGuide 14:17:08 loquacities: right you and everyone else in the universe :) 14:17:14 less chance of duplicating content = good 14:17:24 it does make me wonder how valuable the content is 14:17:30 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/93963/ 14:17:33 we're all here and contributing, and no one seems to know about it ;) 14:17:42 loquacities: it also wasn't publishing correctly and 404 often until yesterday 14:17:51 loquacities: so I don't think there's a value judgement yet 14:17:57 fair enough 14:18:03 AJaeger: maybe not pictures so much as the opportunity to do for examples and stuff 14:18:07 i'm just not sure i support content for content's sake 14:18:28 are we onboarding enough new people to justify the maintenance? 14:18:34 we need to -- so there's that 14:18:40 we need to onboard more 14:18:57 IMO we need to onboard more - and to lower the bar, we need to reorganize the documentation we have 14:19:13 AJaeger: which documentaiton 14:19:20 community-created docs will always have architecture problems 14:19:28 the question is how best to deal with that on an on-going basis 14:19:43 the content delivery model won't change that 14:20:09 loquacities: true dat 14:20:31 annegentle_, Conventions, Howto - and an intro what lives where 14:20:44 AJaeger: so "the documentation we have" is the onboarding info, got it 14:21:02 annegentle_, sorry, in telco - need to multitask... 14:21:03 and the scope/target audience for each doc 14:21:14 AJaeger: so we're still back to wiki reorg or go full-blown docbook booK? 14:21:28 annegentle_, yes, these are the options I see. 14:21:29 AJaeger: aw thanks for multitasking still! 14:21:41 dianefleming: what are your thoughts? Is the docbook worthwhile? (Seems not) 14:22:07 i wish wiki was a little more flexible 14:22:07 hey - maybe for the actual writing process stuff 14:22:15 but not for how to contribute/review in github 14:22:26 its just hard to organize larger docs with it 14:22:29 is that what you're talking about? I'm late to this mtg 14:22:44 dianefleming: ok that's a good distinction. Perhaps we need all three -- wiki pages, contributing.rst, long writers guide 14:22:49 dianefleming: do we use docbook or wiki for the 'documentation guide' 14:22:58 but that's a lot of work 14:23:01 which is how-to for newcomers, conventions, review stuff, etc. 14:23:19 wiki page and contributing.rst could just be a pointer to the docbook... 14:23:21 currently it's on wiki - but also in docbook in "Writers Guide" (written at Rackspace, but we can use that content) 14:23:43 so we're seeing the limits of wiki 14:23:59 i think we should start with one thing - let's move the github content into contributing.rst files 14:24:02 limits of wiki - and a document that has grown over time... 14:24:04 and then see what we have left 14:24:04 and the long book helps with that but I'm afraid we'll just scare off people again 14:24:13 "you need a whole nother book to do this stuff?" /ragequit 14:24:17 lol 14:24:21 annegentle_: +1 14:24:27 annegentle_: but the longer book will have better organization? 14:24:40 organisation doesn't matter if no one is reading it 14:24:45 the super long one-page wiki is scary for some, i think. 14:24:47 what "github content", dianefleming ? 14:25:04 I am not opposed to longer book - the issues are: it gets out of date immediately, people won't read a long book, 14:25:16 are there just three pages we're talking about? -- Contributing, Conventions, WhatGoesWhere 14:25:26 can we break the wiki into multiple pages, linked from a central page? 14:25:29 any other topics for newcomers? 14:25:31 that might be the answere 14:25:32 @AJaeger how to contribute to the github repos, how to review 14:25:33 Howto as well? 14:25:35 you know what? i think we should be asking new contributors 14:25:37 Sam-I-Am: that's what I'm leaning towards 14:25:42 annegentle_: yay! 14:25:43 AJaeger: ah yes 14:25:46 what pages/links/info did they use to get up and running? 14:25:49 AJaeger: but contributing is howto 14:25:53 what was the most important to them then, and now? 14:26:00 #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Documentation/Conventions 14:26:01 annegentle_: my coffee just kicked in 14:26:03 seriously, we have way too much content here, we don't need it all 14:26:10 #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Documentation/HowTo 14:26:16 we can split up the wiki and have a nice link at the top like Conventions has today 14:26:20 @loquacities too much content on the wiki? 14:26:27 everywhere 14:26:43 there's so many pages of new starter content, and it's spread everywhere 14:26:49 for all the projects, yes 14:26:56 we have a pages of links on our own wiki to try and organise it 14:27:03 s/a// 14:27:08 I'd like to fix it for everyone, but for now we fix for our contributors 14:27:22 talking about docs specifically, here 14:27:32 yep 14:27:42 can we put a list of all the new starter content together? 14:27:49 see where the duplication lies 14:27:54 Sam-I-Am: we have that with the header on all the Docs wiki pages 14:28:00 also, can we get web stats on the wiki?> 14:28:01 there are one or two main pages of content that are really useful for new starters, that they refer to again and again 14:28:19 i still refer to the n00b guide :P 14:28:21 Sam-I-Am: hm let me look 14:28:22 let's get those boiled down to a single useful page, then link off to all the extra info if people want to keep reading 14:28:30 one thing we don't document is rebasing for example 14:28:42 annegentle_: thats because it scares people away :P 14:28:47 right 14:29:05 we should reference some git "tips" page 14:29:10 whether its ours or elsewhere 14:29:20 Sam-I-Am: i have content that can be used for that 14:29:24 i'd rather not duplicate effort there if it exists elsewhere 14:29:27 The Documentation/HowTo page has been reorged several times. so either it's time to really simplify it or move it out of the wiki? Or is that oversimplifying? 14:29:43 i think it needs a massive simplification 14:29:52 annegentle_: i think some of the confusion is the howto vs. howto for noobs 14:29:57 #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Category:Documentation - check this for all our Documentation pages that I found ;) 14:30:01 We really need the git tips stuff 14:30:05 creating and reviewing patches is not that difficult on a day-to-day basis 14:30:12 perhaps there should be a "quick start" version ... then a page with the gory details 14:30:20 Sam-I-Am: +1 14:30:29 people see the nice, short quick start version first 14:30:32 I'd like contributing.rst in the openstack-manuals repo to point to these types of resources 14:30:51 it goes through setting up your docs dev environment, submitting a patch, local build, and review 14:31:04 and maybe link to a vagrant VM that includes everything 14:31:20 Documentation and Documentation/Builds have some overlap, I would clean them up 14:31:57 screen shots of what to expect from gerrit/jenkins might help too 14:31:57 Sam-I-Am, so a short page and then links? Works for me... 14:32:17 kind of like we're doing with the install guide... "you should see this" 14:32:32 (and of course the screen shot would include a -1 from dianefleming lol) 14:32:46 lol 14:33:01 @Sam-I-Am A plus 1 from me is invaluable :) 14:33:04 ha ha 14:33:07 hee 14:33:13 :P 14:33:25 dianefleming: lol i'm just giving you crap :P 14:33:32 By far page views for Documentation/HowTo are the most read, followed by just /Documentation 14:33:37 everything else falls off drastically 14:33:45 annegentle_: thats good to know 14:33:51 indeed 14:33:54 except for the conventions :/ 14:33:54 So we should focus on streamlining Documentation/HowTo I think 14:34:00 +1 14:34:04 +1 14:34:06 we need more warm bodies here 14:34:16 Ok so what do we do with the writer's guide? Ditch it? 14:34:28 well, I mean, not take it on into our repo 14:34:31 annegentle_: we still need conventions and a review guide 14:34:44 i think we can make conventions easier to understand/search 14:34:51 right now its a bit overwhelming to find stuff 14:35:00 i still have trouble finding things 14:35:08 ctrl-f ;) 14:35:09 @annegentle here's an idea - can we solicit some of Kelly Holcomb's time and have her edit those editing wiki pages - or suggest a new organization? 14:35:27 dianefleming: we could, I'd rather use her time for openstack docs than metadoc docs 14:35:27 in the howto, i would mention conventions and the review stuff 14:35:34 dianefleming: I think AJaeger can do it 14:35:47 me? What? ;) 14:35:48 Ok, so abandon the writer's guide patch? 14:35:55 streamline the HowTo 14:35:58 coming up with the new organization is important 14:36:02 Let's still do nothing with Conventions... 14:36:10 @annegentle ok - i can help with organization, or a review of whatever org someone comes up with 14:36:15 the decision was to ship the IBM style guide 14:36:18 dianefleming: thanks 14:36:24 ok 14:36:37 i can probably offer some warm bodies from my team to help out 14:36:37 annegentle_: i need some phone books to hold my patio furniture down 14:36:48 AJaeger: you ok with streamlining HowTo? (Sorry to ask all these things while you're not infront of a computer) 14:36:51 I can work on the build related stuff - in Documentation, Build and Howto as a first step 14:36:55 we're having style discussions within our org right now, too, so it fits well with what we're doing 14:37:02 loquacities: sounds good, though again, there are other doc tasks that are higher value 14:37:08 I'm infront of the computer - with my whole team here ;) 14:37:09 understood 14:37:19 how do we distribute the work on a wiki? 14:37:26 it doesnt really lock pages 14:37:29 loquacities: ok the decision was to ship Ibm Style guide rather than having RedHat or Rackspace open-source their style guides 14:37:36 maybe put a note on it that you're working on it? 14:37:38 AJaeger: ah ha ha 14:37:48 annegentle_: ok, interesting decision 14:37:52 is there more background there? 14:37:52 AJaeger: so are you ok with not bringing in the writer's guide? 14:38:03 loquacities: it was an unexpected outcome :) 14:38:07 indeed 14:38:08 annegentle_, yes, I am. 14:38:11 AJaeger: ok 14:38:31 So whose task is it to streamline HowTo? 14:38:41 i think andreas raised his hand :P 14:38:59 i think andreas got voluntold :P 14:39:02 heh 14:39:07 * AJaeger hides 14:39:08 Ok sorry for taking up so much time there 14:39:11 nice thing if we separate into multiple wiki pages is multiple people can edit them 14:39:16 annegentle_, give me the action ;) 14:39:18 annegentle_: i'll probably take the review guide 14:39:21 #action AJaeger to streamline Documentation/HowTo 14:39:38 annegentle_, that includes changes to Documentation/Build and Documentation 14:39:40 #action AJaeger to abandon writer's guide patch and blueprint 14:39:42 annegentle_: should we keep it at the current wiki page? 14:39:52 Sam-I-Am: absolutely 14:39:56 cool 14:39:57 don't break links 14:40:00 right 14:40:02 Ok 14:40:03 Sam-I-Am, there are links to it. 14:40:04 #topic Continuous publishing/automation decisions 14:40:18 #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/summit-b301-ci-doc-automation 14:40:25 great discussion 14:40:43 we've made more decisions in this meeting than all the neutron sessions last week :P 14:40:46 we want to hire a designer to work on the output 14:40:49 I have 2 leads there 14:40:56 meeting with one next week 14:41:01 will set up meeting with other as well 14:41:25 Gauvain will enhance the flagmappings to show new, renamed, deprecated config settings 14:41:41 Adding the OpenStack Security Notes as an appendix to the Security Guide 14:41:43 and dcramer has a first patch for single-html page for each book 14:41:50 did we also submit a patch for highlighting within output? 14:41:56 he did 14:41:59 yay 14:42:08 we'll also work on moving away from Cloud Sites with the infra team 14:42:10 https://review.openstack.org/94497 Sam-I-Am 14:42:19 but first move to rsync 14:42:26 sound like a good summary? 14:42:38 #topic Integrated projects 14:42:45 We had a nice session mostly on ceilometer 14:42:46 annegentle_, not sure about the "first move" - might be that we move directly away... 14:42:59 #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/beefing-up-user-and-operations-guides 14:43:12 AJaeger: ah maybe not rsync first, that's wha tyou mean? 14:43:25 AJaeger: thx 14:43:38 annegentle_, yeah, we might do rsync only as part of moving away from Cloud Sites 14:43:48 AJaeger: got it 14:44:24 So, one pull quote from the integrated session is something I want to make sure we all know about "Need to ensure that all new integrated projects are capable of meeting the TC-mandated doc requirements." 14:44:26 annegentle_, jeblair told me to give him at least a month to brainstorm and design something... 14:44:35 (for moving away) 14:44:45 AJaeger: ok good to know... 14:45:28 Since our mission is "core" but we need to accomodate needs for integrating projects this continues to be thorny with our current resourcing 14:45:45 I do plan to write a set of guidlines for integrating 14:45:56 but we have to hold a hard line in order to not be overwhelmed 14:46:15 an example is the request for the Orchestration chapter in the user guide -- that's my request, their counter is a separate guide 14:46:30 I'm willing to negotiate but have real concerns that aren't all figured out yet 14:47:05 please be aware for now, and offer suggestions on the mailing list about how to help raise the bar for incubating and integrated projects 14:47:09 yeah... i dont buy a separate guide for that 14:47:15 seems like a user thing 14:47:15 Sam-I-Am: right 14:47:33 its great that we classify docs by the target audience 14:47:35 So I also wanted to talk about roadmaps for process possibly 14:47:40 there's some crossover, but not much 14:47:43 #topic Roadmap tasks 14:47:54 I want to experiment with roadmaps for docs 14:48:05 * AJaeger liked what annegentle_ wrote up 14:48:15 however I am finding it's difficult to ensure assignment is well-known 14:48:19 what do you all think? 14:48:28 what do you mean? 14:48:46 like... who's doing what? 14:49:10 Sam-I-Am: it's kludgy to know who's going to work on a roadmap task, do they update the roadmap.rst and put their name on the line they want to work on? 14:49:15 Sam-I-Am, avoiding duplication of effort. Saying "I will do x" 14:49:16 that's how I have it written now 14:49:23 but I think it's clumsy 14:49:25 ok, thats what i thought 14:49:48 most other projects are going from blueprints to program-specs 14:49:53 we could do that too 14:49:57 i was wondering about that 14:50:00 please no! 14:50:01 but I really liked the roadmap idea for docs 14:50:04 tom sent an email about it 14:50:06 annegentle_, putting it on the line works - we approve them without review IMO 14:50:11 no specs repo, PLEASE 14:50:23 sld: why? 14:50:36 AJaeger: I think it's worth a try 14:50:40 the roadmap idea is great... its just managing who is doing what. the name thing isn't too bad, its just how it flows through the review system 14:50:41 Sam-I-Am: to where? 14:50:50 it adds another layer of complexity, it adds more time delays, it adds a lot more into what doesn't need to be. 14:50:53 Sam-I-Am: (tom's email) 14:51:02 annegentle_: undisclosed recipients it looks 14:51:06 it didnt go to a list 14:51:10 annegentle_, agreed. I'm sure we iterate a bit... 14:51:11 want me to forward? 14:51:21 Sam-I-Am: sure 14:51:43 AJaeger: ok, let's merge in those roadmaps then (have to see if any more -1s) this week 14:52:04 annegentle_: sent 14:52:11 annegentle_, you'll get my +2s later ;) 14:52:21 AJaeger: sounds good 14:52:29 #topic Doc tools news 14:52:38 Released 0.14 of openstack-doc-tools this week 14:52:44 * AJaeger thanks annegentle_ ! 14:52:49 and there are patches from david cramer with our requests from last week, woo 14:53:03 AJaeger: thank you! That fixed the really weird oddity with the API Reference 14:53:42 Ok, let's go with open discussion 14:53:47 #topic Open discussion 14:54:00 my head is spinning... 14:54:09 it was great to meet everyone last week 14:54:16 i think we made some good progress 14:54:30 yeah, i'm sorry i couldn't make it :( 14:54:33 :/ 14:54:38 It was a really productive week -- sometimes they aren't, honestly, but this one was very decisive and productive 14:54:40 It was really great to see so many friendly faces for the first time! 14:54:52 Thanks all of you for your leadership in sessions. 14:54:52 i wish i could help neutron :/ 14:55:01 poor neutron... 14:55:06 heh 14:55:38 things to do... upgrade guide for icehouse, install guide updates, review guide. 14:55:42 My to-do list is a mile long but I'm working through i 14:55:43 it 14:55:46 annegentle_: me too 14:55:52 but i have all this free time now :P 14:56:03 :P will try to fix that! 14:56:10 its just about fixed 14:56:31 Sam-I-Am, really? Excellent! 14:56:31 yes, good news!!! 14:56:35 yesterday in the project meeting, the PTLs decided to rename their project-specs repos to program-specs 14:56:40 been a wee bit preoccupied of late... 14:56:41 so nova-specs will become compute-specs 14:56:51 minor life issues... 14:56:56 you sure? 14:57:13 sld: hi there, btw. 14:57:17 when i made a nova bp this morning, when i was being reminded to use the nova-specs repo, no one said anything about it being renamed. lol 14:57:20 lol 14:57:26 glad I finally figured out this is the third Wed. of May :) 14:57:35 sld: yeah just happened yesterday 14:57:43 sld, it will be renamed once the infra team has time for it... 14:57:46 sld: so I'm sure most people don't know 14:57:55 poor infra 14:57:58 renames are the worst 14:57:59 i wonder what the motivation was 14:58:01 sld, renames don't happen suddenly, they need to be planned... 14:58:05 yeah 14:58:09 Sam-I-Am: you can review the logs 14:58:12 so my team have some spare time coming up for focusing on openstack, what should they be looking at? 14:58:37 #link http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/project/2014/project.2014-05-20-21.03.log.html 14:58:43 loquacities: roadmap tasks 14:58:47 loquacities: per book 14:58:51 loquacities: please :) 14:59:05 no problem at all 14:59:05 loquacities, great! 14:59:08 thanks :) 14:59:13 roadmap sure makes it easy 14:59:17 that and bugs, of course 14:59:20 plenty of those roaming around 14:59:25 as always ;) 14:59:48 loquacities: yes bug triaging and fixing 15:00:01 Sam-I-Am: should they pick up some install guide tasks? 15:00:11 yeah, i was leaning towards install guide 15:00:35 annegentle_: sure. i think we need to get one chapter completely done and use it as a reference 15:00:47 right now theres a few chapters that are close 15:01:03 if you're interested in content, the "overview" sections of each chapter could use some love 15:01:08 vs. plain old restructuring 15:01:22 that's probably a nice project for my newbies 15:01:25 loquacities: ok thanks! 15:01:27 yeah, it is 15:01:27 i'll sic them on to that 15:01:29 Better give up the meeting room 15:01:31 #endmeeting