Jeremy Stanley <[email protected]> wrote on 11/05/2015 07:11:37 PM: > From: Jeremy Stanley <[email protected]> > To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" > <[email protected]> > Date: 11/05/2015 07:17 PM > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [all][bugs] Developers Guide: Who's merging that? > > On 2015-11-05 16:23:56 +0100 (+0100), Markus Zoeller wrote: > > some months ago I wrote down all the things a developer should know > > about the bug handling process in general [1]. It is written as a > > project agnostic thing and got some +1s but it isn't merged yet. > > It would be helpful when I could use it to give this as a pointer > > to new contributors as I'm under the impression that the mental image > > differs a lot among the contributors. So, my questions are: > > > > 1) Who's in charge of merging such non-project-specific things? > [...] > > This is a big part of the problem your addition is facing, in my > opinion. The OpenStack Infrastructure Manual is an attempt at a > technical manual for interfacing with the systems written and > maintained by the OpenStack Project Infrastructure team. It has, > unfortunately, also grown some sections which contain cultural > background and related recommendations because until recently there > was no better venue for those topics, but we're going to be ripping > those out and proposing them to documents maintained by more > appropriate teams at the earliest opportunity.
I've written this for the Nova docs originally but got sent to the infra-manual as the "project agnostic thing". > Bug management falls into a grey area currently, where a lot of the > information contributors need is cultural background mixed with > workflow information on using Launchpad (which is not really managed > by the Infra team). [...] True, that's what I try to contribute here. I'm aware of the intended change in our issue tracker and tried to write the text so it needs only a few changes when this transition is done. > Cultural content about the lifecycle of bugs, standard practices for > triage, et cetera are likely better suited to the newly created > Project Team Guide;[...] The Project Team Guide was news to me, I'm going to have a look if it would fit. > So anyway, to my main point, topics in collaboratively-maintained > documentation are going to end up being closely tied to the > expertise of the review team for the document being targeted. In the > case of the Infra Manual that's the systems administrators who > configure and maintain our community infrastructure. I won't speak > for others on the team, but I don't personally feel comfortable > deciding what details a user should include in a bug report for > python-novaclient, or how the Cinder team should triage their bug > reports. > > I expect that the lack of core reviews are due to: > > 1. Few of the core reviewers feel they can accurately judge much of > the content you've proposed in that change. > > 2. Nobody feels empowered to tell you that this large and > well-written piece of documentation you've spent a lot of time > putting together is a poor fit and should be split up and much of it > put somewhere else more suitable (especially without a suggestion as > to where that might be). > > 3. The core review team for this is the core review team for all our > infrastructure systems, and we're all unfortunately very behind in > handling the current review volume. Maybe the time has come for me to think about starting a blog... Thanks Stanley, for your time and feedback. Regards, Markus Zoeller (markus_z) __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
