[openstack-dev] Contributing to docs without Docbook -- YES you can!
As you know, we're always looking for ways for people to be able to contribute to Docs, but we do understand that there's a certain amount of pain involved in dealing with Docbook. So to try and make this process easier, we're going to try an experiment. What we've put together is a system where you can update a wiki with links to content in whatever form you've got it -- gist on github, wiki page, blog post, whatever -- and we have a dedicated resource that will turn it into actual documentation, in Docbook. If you want to be added as a co-author on the patch, make sure to provide us the email address you used to become a Foundation member. Because we know that the networking documentation needs particular attention, we're starting there. We have a Networking Guide, from which we will ultimately pull information to improve the networking section of the admin guide. The preliminary Table of Contents is here: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/NetworkingGuide/TOC , and the instructions for contributing are as follows: 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, wiki page, blog post, etc.) under the associated topic. 4. Send e-mail to reviewers network...@openstacknow.com. 5. A writer turns the content into an actual patch, with tracking bug, and docs reviewers (and the original author, we would hope) make sure it gets reviewed and merged. Please let us know if you have any questions/comments. Thanks! Nick -- Nick Chase 1-650-567-5640 Technical Marketing Manager, Mirantis Editor, OpenStack:Now ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] Propose project story wiki idea
On 11/21/2013 4:43 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: The trick is, such coverage requires editors with a deep technical knowledge, both to be able to determine significant news from marketing noise *and* to be able to deep dive into a new feature and make an article out of it that makes a good read for developers or OpenStack deployers. It's also a full-time job, even if some of those deep-dive articles could just be contributed by their developers. LWN is an exception rather than the rule in the tech press. It would be absolutely awesome if we managed to build something like it to cover OpenStack, but finding the right people (the right skill set + the will and the time to do it) will be, I fear, extremely difficult. Thoughts ? Volunteers ? (raises hand) As it happens, according to my job description, doing a deep dive into a new feature and make an article out of it that makes a good read for developers or OpenStack deployers) IS my full time job, and as of yesterday, so is keeping up with weekly technical news that would cover updates from major projects. :) The information site's just emerging from beta (when I get back after Thanksgiving, likely) but I'm sure we can work something out. So I'm happy to head this up, if nobody else has time. Nick ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
[openstack-dev] Release notes
Is there a target date for updating the release notes at https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/ReleaseNotes/Havana (other than Keystone, which is already there)? I'm trying to get a handle on what new features actually made it into Havana. Or is there a better way to figure that out, other than wading through hundreds of bugs? Thanks... Nick ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] trove is already a source package in Debian and a Python module in PyPi
On 10/1/2013 10:53 AM, Michael Basnight wrote: Well this sucks. Im not sure im a fan of renaming it because of the previous existence of a package. Renaming is not fun. Ill let the more experienced openstack peoples help decide on this... Certainly it's not fun, but wouldn't it be easier to do it NOW, rather than later? Nick ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
