My intention based on current understandign would be to create a git repo called "osops-docs" as this fits current naming an thin initial document we intend to put there and the others we may adopt from docs-team.
My understanding being they don't to have this type of documentention due to much reduced team size and prefer it live with subject matter experts. It that correct? If that's not correct I'm not personally opposed to trying this under docs. We'll need to maintain enough contributors and reviewers to make the work flow go in either location and that's my understanding of the basic issue not where it lives. This naming would also match other repos wich could be consolidated into an "osops" repo to rule them all. That may make sense as I think there's significant overlap in set of people who might contribute, but that can be a parallel conversation. Doug looking at new project docs I think most of it is clear enough to me. Since it's not code I can skip all th PyPi stuff yes? The repo creation seems pretty clear and I can steal the CI stuff from similar projects. I'm a little unclear on the Storyboard bit I've not done much contribution lately and haven't storyboarded. Is that relevant (or at least relevent at first) for this use case? If it is I probably have more questions. I agree governance can also be a parallel discussion. I don't have strong opinions there but seems based on participants and content like a "UC" thing but < shrug /> -Jon _______________________________________________ OpenStack-operators mailing list OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
