openstack-doc-core team mailing list archive

[Anne Gentle <anne@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sun, Aug 23, 2015 at 5:10 PM, Pančur, Matjaž <Matjaz.Pancur@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> As Lana pointed out in her last What’s Up, Doc? mail, labs are now in a
> separate repo and also not under the original scope of the Training guides
> any more. So we need to (at least) redefine the project’s scope and I would
> also really like to reignite it from it’s (unformal?) freeze.
>
> Steps that I think we need to do:
> - redefine scope (now focused on the Upstream training and Training slides)
> - reorganise and expand the team
> - prepare Upstream material for the Tokyo summit
> - prepare the Upstream material in shorter versions (Sean already has some
> material for 2 or 4 hour versions, more suitable for user groups)
> - start submitting patches for the Training slides (this appears as the
> most difficult part).
> - to avoid duplication of the content between longer and shorter versions
> of the slides, I propose to build this shorter versions with an automated
> process of “cherrypicking” the right slides from the longer version (so we
> can just define the which slides from the longer version would appear in 2
> and which in 4 hour versions). This way, it will be easier to maintain.
>
> As Lana suggested to Sean, some project’s statuary things can be postponed
> and resolved at the Tokyo Summit. In the mean time, I already took some
> steps I believe are good in any case:
>
> 1. I cleaned up the project's bug queue (it went from 59 to 6):
>   - a lot of bugs in our queue that are now obsolete (as they were for
> Icehouse version and it is no longer published).
>   - quite a few  bugs were in status Fix committed and as the patch was
> already in the master branch, I changed the status to Fix released (so that
> they don’t show in the bug queue anymore)
>   - the queue still contains 4 bugs for the labs. Should I move them to
> the OpenStack-manuals?
> 2. I already talked with a colleague from my lab to help with the project.
> If there are no objections, I can also post this mail to the Docs regular
> ML to try to gather more interested candidates?
>

Oh yes, didn't realize this was just to -core. Please do!



> 3. I intend to start submitting patches for the Training slides. I believe
> that once the thing starts rolling, more community members will chip in.
> Slides will be as “generic” as it is possible (regarding OpenStack
> Releases). A lot of (beginner oriented) content is now stable enough to not
> change much between versions.
>
> We can also discuss all this tomorrow on our regular IRC meeting. I’ll put
> this stuff on the agenda.
>
> Thoughts? Suggestions?
>
> Regards,
> Matjaz
>
>
> > On 05 Aug 2015, at 23:30, Lana Brindley <openstack@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
> >
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > Sean, it's great to hear from you! Thanks so much for jumping in here :)
> >
> > On 06/08/15 07:05, Sean Roberts wrote:
> >> Sorry I missed your earlier outreach. Yes the icehouse docs are out
> >> of date and can be hidden. The upstream materials however are
> >> active. I am giving a another 2 hour upstream training tomorrow. I
> >> would like to publish the slide updates so the students can access
> >> them and other user groups can utilize them. I am assuming that
> >> even though Stefano has left the foundation that the Upstream
> >> Training will continue as part of the summit and user groups.
> >
> > Yes, I've noticed some planning for that on the community mailing
> > list. I'll reach out to them and find out what their requirements are.
> >
> >>
> >> We need to figure out how to integrate the user group training that
> >> is occurring with the training labs. It has been difficult to
> >> separate the developer need for devstack builds versus the
> >> operator's needs of something stable to learn on. Invariably, those
> >> that can contribute time to teach default to devstack, because it
> >> is what they know with their limited volunteer time. If we can get
> >> actual trainers involved with user group training events, then
> >> training labs I think will get traction. My team is starting to run
> >> Neutron user group training sessions and my developers want
> >> devstack because it is what they use in gate testing as well as
> >> for customer demonstrations. My operators will likely want
> >> something more stable like training labs when they start running
> >> the training events.
> >
> > I understand these issues, and agree that we do need to spend some
> > time working on resolving this. However, it's outside of my scope for
> > the moment. What I really need is to ensure that the people who are
> > able to work on training guides right now can do so in an effective
> > way. I'm happy to discuss this matter in greater depth over time,
> > though. Will you be in Tokyo? Perhaps a training guides session is a
> > good idea?
> >
> > L
> >
> > - --
> > Lana Brindley
> > Technical Writer
> > Rackspace Cloud Builders Australia
> > http://lanabrindley.com
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> > Version: GnuPG v1
> >
> > iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJVwoB3AAoJELppzVb4+KUyZoYIAL397shbSpCkL/A8lAH/lMKl
> > yy4jw2TqpcGPjzgiu+eGfNTMw2jhzjWP262xP3hT463PmMdw5UiM1ZhsXdj+cqKL
> > Bjwd8krJD215Ft7Hwez0GY/kSeS0VKMHXdeFdtXpQaMIZtKMvudUllZRjK3bp5vP
> > OcHm2O7B/58sFFHJ5De2DqoXppV2wB9Y8CA1KFy/wU9mhZB+SlPBFF/33KZ4EI+J
> > xYjLto2QdVKoZ7S+LSUw8Y9iYaf0b9LSmI7IJohy0FKVRP0rdl0ZYmpjb1ZQ3M13
> > tuK7Bzks1iNrImHz4nlcllEfShX+YWWktXrxVpFWMifz+Orzk6IiWj8B5rJbjf8=
> > =4FFo
> > -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>