On 12/10/16 15:13 +0000, Hayes, Graham wrote:
On 12/10/2016 16:08, Doug Hellmann wrote:
Excerpts from Flavio Percoco's message of 2016-10-12 14:50:03 +0200:

One of the common complains about the existing project organization in the big
tent is that it's difficult to wrap our heads around the many projects there
are, their current state (in/out the big tent), their tags, etc.

This information is available on the governance website[0]. Each official
project team has a page there containing the information related to the
deliverables managed by that team. Unfortunately, I don't think this page is
checked often enough and I believe it's not known by everyone.

In the hope that we can make this information clearer to people browsing the
many repos (most likely on github), I'd like to propose that we include the
information of each deliverable in the readme file. This information would be
rendered along with the rest of the readme (at least on Github, which might not
be our main repo but it's the place most humans go to to check our projects).

Rather than duplicating this information, I'd like to find a way to just
"include it" in the Readme file. As far as showing the "official" badge goes, I
believe it'd be quite simple. We can do it the same way CI tags are exposed when
using travis (just include an image). As for the rest of the tags, it might
require some extra hacking.

So, before I start digging more into this, I wanted to get other opinions/ideas
on this topic and how we can make this information more evident to the rest of
the community (and people not as familiar with our processes as some of us are).

Thanks in advance,

[0] http://governance.openstack.org/reference/projects/index.html

Is your proposal that a tag like release:cycle-with-milestones would
result in a badge being added when the README.rst is rendered on
github.com? Would that work for git.openstack.org, too?

I agree that the governance site is not the best place to put the
info to make it discoverable. Do users look first at the source
repository, or at some other documentation?


I like this idea.

I know when I am looking at software, I look at the source repo

We could do it in the readme, and maybe re-use it in the docs as well?

Yup! Re-using this in the docs is definitely part of the plan.

I would be willing to dig in and help if needed.

Might take your word on this :D


Flavio Percoco

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe

Reply via email to