On Sun, Aug 23, 2015 at 5:10 PM, Pančur, Matjaž <matjaz.pan...@fri.uni-lj.si > 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 <openst...@lanabrindley.com> > 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----- > >
-- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack-doc-core Post to : openstack-doc-core@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack-doc-core More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
