On Sun, Oct 5, 2014 at 11:26 PM, Tom Fifield <t...@openstack.org> wrote:

> On 04/10/14 04:03, Nick Chase wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 3:07 PM, Stefano Maffulli <stef...@openstack.org
> > <mailto:stef...@openstack.org>> wrote:
> >     >  1. Pick an existing topic or create a new topic. For new topics,
> >     we're
> >     >     primarily interested in deployment scenarios.
> >     >  2. Develop content (text and/or diagrams) in a format that
> >     supports at
> >     >     least basic markup (e.g., titles, paragraphs, lists, etc.).
> >     >  3. Provide a link to the content (e.g., gist on github.com
> >     <http://github.com>, wiki page,
> >     >     blog post, etc.) under the associated topic.
> >
> >     Points 1-3 seem to be oriented at removing Launchpad from the
> equation.
> >     Is that all there is? I guess it makes sense to remove obstacles,
> >     although editing the wiki (since it requires a launchpad account
> anyway)
> >     may not be the best way to track progress and see assignments.
> >
> >
> > No, really, the main change is in step 5.  Launchpad isn't the problem,
> > as far as we can tell; Docbook is.
>
> Hi Nick,
>
> As best I can tell - 'step 5' has been in place for at least the last
> few summits at least, so this is not a change :) We have had a policy
> where anyone can dump text in bug reports and we'll wrangle it. This has
> been popular, see eg Marco Cossoni's contributions, but in my opinion
> not widely enough communicated - so thanks for your efforts.


Right, again, it's fantastic that people can dump text in bug reports, and
yes, it's probably not well known.  We're just trying to sort of widen out
what people are sending from a few paragraphs to entire topics.  But hey,
the general idea is the same. We're all trying to get to the same point.

Obviously there's something about the current process that's not working as
well as it could.  This experiment is about trying to figure out what.  If
all we're changing is moving the contribution point from a bug report to a
wiki, then great; having just one changed variable among control variables
is good science.


>
> >     >  4. Send e-mail to reviewers network...@openstacknow.com
> >     <mailto:network...@openstacknow.com>.
> >
> >     Why not use the docs mailing list or other facilities on
> >     @openstack.org <http://openstack.org>?
> >     Who is responding to that address?
> >
> >
> > If someone want to provide us a list on @openstack.org
> > <http://openstack.org>, that'd be awesome.  I set up this address
> > because I control the forwarding and could do it immediately without
> > having to ask for anyone's approval. :)
> >
> > People on the alias are myself, Edgar Magana, Matt Kasawara, Phil
> > Hopkins, Anne Gentle, and Elke Vorheis.
>
> I find it quite odd that the larger team is being excluded from this
> effort. Why would it need a separate mailing list?
>

We haven't intentionally excluded anybody; we were just keeping it small
both to keep it a focused effort -- this way we could more easily hash
things out without anybody stepping on anybody else -- and so that we
weren't essentially volunteering people against their will. :) But we can
easily change it over to the main docs list.

----  Nick
_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Reply via email to