openstack-doc-core team mailing list archive

[Brian Moss <kallimachos@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 4 April 2017 at 06:52, Lana Brindley <openstack@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On 04/04/17 03:48, Andreas Jaeger wrote:
> > On 2017-04-03 17:47, Anne Gentle wrote:
> >> Ah, okay, I wasn't sure if I remembered correctly and didn't take time
> >> to look it up, eep.
> >>
> >> So, we should probably have that discussion of scope of docs core
> >> reviewers. For example, docs tools are super important and becoming
> >> moreso as we enable more teams and become consultants. As another
> >> example, someone like me, who focuses on all API docs but the source
> >> changes are reviewed in other repos, I simply won't have the numbers to
> >> remain core on openstack-manuals.
> >>
> >> What do others think? Is my view basically unique due to my specialty
> area?
> >
> > We have very few repos and should either look at them together - or have
> > different policies for them.
> >
> > As long as we do not have separate core teams for the different
> > components, we should find a good balance and include tools, api-site -
> > and consider also how to handle security-guide.
> >
> > Btw. let's not split core-teams, I think that opens a completely
> > different set of problems,
>
> Yeah, let's make sure we're covering the repos that we expect our cores to
> act in. I'm not sure which module works best here.
>
>
+1. Documentation Official is probably a good starting point, although we
may need to finesse it a bit.

Also, yea to Alex's core team recommendation for April.

Brian