Excerpts from Petr Kovar's message of 2018-05-16 17:39:14 +0200: > Hi all, > > In the past few years, we've seen several efforts aimed at automating > procedural documentation, mostly centered around the OpenStack > installation guide. This idea to automatically produce and verify > installation steps or similar procedures was mentioned again at the last > Summit (https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/SYD-install-guide-testing). > > It was brought to my attention that the tripleo team has been working on > automating some of the tripleo deployment procedures, using a Bash script > with included comment lines to supply some RST-formatted narrative, for > example: > > https://github.com/openstack/tripleo-quickstart-extras/blob/master/roles/overcloud-prep-images/templates/overcloud-prep-images.sh.j2 > > The Bash script can then be converted to RST, e.g.: > > https://thirdparty.logs.rdoproject.org/jenkins-tripleo-quickstart-queens-rdo_trunk-baremetal-dell_fc430_envB-single_nic_vlans-27/docs/build/ > > Source Code: > > https://github.com/openstack/tripleo-quickstart-extras/tree/master/roles/collect-logs > > I really liked this approach and while I don't want to sound like selling > other people's work, I'm wondering if there is still an interest among the > broader OpenStack community in automating documentation like this? > > Thanks, > pk >
Weren't the folks doing the training-labs or training-guides taking a similar approach? IIRC, they ended up implementing what amounted to their own installer for OpenStack, and then ended up with all of the associated upgrade and testing burden. I like the idea of trying to use some automation from this, but I wonder if we'd be better off extracting data from other tools, rather than building a new one. Doug __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
