On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 4:05 AM, Neil Jerram <neil.jer...@metaswitch.com> wrote: > > Stefano Maffulli <stef...@openstack.org> writes: > > > On 12/09/2014 04:11 PM, by wrote: > >>>>[vad] how about the documentation in this case?... bcos it needs some > >> place to document (a short desc and a link to vendor page) or list these > >> kind of out-of-tree plugins/drivers... just to make the user aware of > >> the availability of such plugins/driers which is compatible with so and > >> so openstack release. > >> I checked with the documentation team and according to them, only the > >> following plugins/drivers only will get documented... > >> 1) in-tree plugins/drivers (full documentation) > >> 2) third-party plugins/drivers (ie, one implements and follows this new > >> proposal, a.k.a partially-in-tree due to the integration module/code)... > >> > >> *** no listing/mention about such completely out-of-tree > plugins/drivers*** > > > > Discoverability of documentation is a serious issue. As I commented on > > docs spec [1], I think there are already too many places, mini-sites and > > random pages holding information that is relevant to users. We should > > make an effort to keep things discoverable, even if not maintained > > necessarily by the same, single team. > > > > I think the docs team means that they are not able to guarantee > > documentation for third-party *themselves* (and has not been able, too). > > The docs team is already overworked as it is now, they can't take on > > more responsibilities. > > > > So once Neutron's code will be split, documentation for the users of all > > third-party modules should find a good place to live in, indexed and > > searchable together where the rest of the docs are. I'm hoping that we > > can find a place (ideally under docs.openstack.org?) where third-party > > documentation can live and be maintained by the teams responsible for > > the code, too. > > > > Thoughts? > > I suggest a simple table, under docs.openstack.org, where each row has > the plugin/driver name, and then links to the documentation and code. > There should ideally be a very lightweight process for vendors to add > their row(s) to this table, and to edit those rows. > > I don't think it makes sense for the vendor documentation itself to be > under docs.openstack.org, while the code is out of tree. > > Stef has suggested docs.openstack.org/third-party as a potential location on the review at [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/133372/.
The proposal currently is that the list's source would be in the openstack-manuals repository, and the process for adding to that repo is the same as all OpenStack contributions. I plan to finalize the plan in January, thanks all for the input, and keep it coming. Anne > Regards, > Neil > > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
