On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 4:05 AM, Neil Jerram <neil.jer...@metaswitch.com>
wrote:
>
> Stefano Maffulli <stef...@openstack.org> writes:
>
> > On 12/09/2014 04:11 PM,  by wrote:
> >>>>[vad] how about the documentation in this case?... bcos it needs some
> >> place to document (a short desc and a link to vendor page) or list these
> >> kind of out-of-tree plugins/drivers...  just to make the user aware of
> >> the availability of such plugins/driers which is compatible with so and
> >> so openstack release.
> >> I checked with the documentation team and according to them, only the
> >> following plugins/drivers only will get documented...
> >> 1) in-tree plugins/drivers (full documentation)
> >> 2) third-party plugins/drivers (ie, one implements and follows this new
> >> proposal, a.k.a partially-in-tree due to the integration module/code)...
> >>
> >> *** no listing/mention about such completely out-of-tree
> plugins/drivers***
> >
> > Discoverability of documentation is a serious issue. As I commented on
> > docs spec [1], I think there are already too many places, mini-sites and
> > random pages holding information that is relevant to users. We should
> > make an effort to keep things discoverable, even if not maintained
> > necessarily by the same, single team.
> >
> > I think the docs team means that they are not able to guarantee
> > documentation for third-party *themselves* (and has not been able, too).
> > The docs team is already overworked as it is now, they can't take on
> > more responsibilities.
> >
> > So once Neutron's code will be split, documentation for the users of all
> > third-party modules should find a good place to live in, indexed and
> > searchable together where the rest of the docs are. I'm hoping that we
> > can find a place (ideally under docs.openstack.org?) where third-party
> > documentation can live and be maintained by the teams responsible for
> > the code, too.
> >
> > Thoughts?
>
> I suggest a simple table, under docs.openstack.org, where each row has
> the plugin/driver name, and then links to the documentation and code.
> There should ideally be a very lightweight process for vendors to add
> their row(s) to this table, and to edit those rows.
>
> I don't think it makes sense for the vendor documentation itself to be
> under docs.openstack.org, while the code is out of tree.
>
>
Stef has suggested docs.openstack.org/third-party as a potential location
on the review at [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/133372/.

The proposal currently is that the list's source would be in the
openstack-manuals repository, and the process for adding to that repo is
the same as all OpenStack contributions.

I plan to finalize the plan in January, thanks all for the input, and keep
it coming.

Anne


> Regards,
>         Neil
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Reply via email to