Merge "Contributor Guide miscellaneous process updates"

This commit is contained in:
Jenkins 2016-07-29 13:14:11 +00:00 committed by Gerrit Code Review
commit 20b0bf028f
6 changed files with 122 additions and 44 deletions

View File

@ -51,6 +51,18 @@ To patch for the release-specific documentation, you should generally patch to
master branch with "backport: xxxx" (for example, backport: kilo) in the commit
message.
For these guides, the docs.openstack.org site defaults to the current release,
with the previous two releases being available under the ``More Releases
& Languages`` drop-down. At release time, the documentation release team
will update the default page to the new release, and remove the link to
the oldest release. These docs are still available online for people who
have direct URLs to the content, but they are no longer linked from the
main site. For books written in DocBook XML, these old versions are clearly
marked with the release name in red down the left-hand margin. We are
currently developing a similar method of marking older books written in RST.
The core team tracks usage of older versions, and as usage falls, can
remove them entirely.
Installation Guides
-------------------

View File

@ -9,14 +9,13 @@ Reviewing documentation
docs-review-guidelines.rst
OpenStack documentation is treated like code.
We follow the standard code review process.
To see what documentation changes are ready for review, use the
`Documentation Program Dashboard <http://is.gd/openstackdocsreview>`_.
It is organized in groupings based on the audience for the documentation.
To see current proposed changes, make sure you register and
log into https://review.openstack.org.
For more details on the review process, see `Code Review
OpenStack documentation is treated in the same way as code, and follows the
standard code review process. To see what documentation changes are ready for
review, use the `Documentation Program Dashboard
<http://is.gd/openstackdocsreview>`_. It is organized in groups based on the
audience for the documentation. To see current proposed changes, make sure
you register and log into https://review.openstack.org. For more details on
the review process, see `Code Review
<http://docs.openstack.org/infra/manual/developers.html#code-review>`_.
Repositories and core team
@ -33,8 +32,8 @@ special rules apply:
* security-doc: has a separate core team consisting of Docs team members and
Security team members. The rule here is that each patch needs an approval
by a Docs core and a Security core.
* training-guides: has a separate core team.
* training-labs: has a separate core team.
* training-guides and training-labs: have separate core teams, but also
includes the openstack-manuals core team.
The current list of docs cores for openstack-manuals can be found at
https://review.openstack.org/#/admin/groups/30,members.
@ -78,32 +77,23 @@ Once done, follow the steps below to submit a patch review.
`Peer Review
<http://docs.openstack.org/infra/manual/developers.html#peer-review>`_
Achieving a core reviewer status
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Achieving core reviewer status
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Core reviewers are able to +2 and merge content into the projects they
have the core status in. Core status is granted to **those who have not
have core status in. Core status is granted to those who have not
only done a sufficient quantity of reviews, but who also have shown care
and wisdom in those reviews**. Becoming a core reviewer also carries with
it a responsibility: you are now the **guardian of the gate**, and
it is up to the core team to ensure that nothing unfavorable gets through,
without discouraging contributions.
The core reviewer's role is complex, and having a great core team is
crucial to the success of any OpenStack project.
and wisdom in those reviews.
With great power comes great responsibility.
For this reason, we want to ensure that we have a suitably small team of
core reviewers, but that each core reviewer we have is active and engaged.
In order to do this, we changed the process for achieving core reviewer
status to ensure there was a good mix between a statistics-based and
nomination-based approach. This means a couple of things:
* The core team changes slightly faster than before, with inactive core
team members being removed and new, active core team members being added
on a more regular basis.
* Now, the existing core team can act faster on recognizing valuable team
members.
The core reviewer's role is complex, and having a great core team is crucial
to the success of any OpenStack project. The documentation team aims to have
a suitably small team of core reviewers, with each core reviewer being active
and engaged. The process for appointing core reviewers aims to ensure there
is a good mix between a statistics-based and nomination-based approach. To
this end, the core team changes relatively quickly, with inactive core team
members being removed and new, active core team members being added on a
regular basis. This also allows the existing core team to act quickly on
recognizing valuable team members.
The process is:
@ -117,9 +107,62 @@ The process is:
* The PTL then consults the existing core team with a list of names to be
removed from and added to the core list. Once an agreement is reached,
the changes are made and advertised to the main documentation mailing list.
Cores who are being removed will be contacted personally before removal.
Cores who are being added or removed will be contacted personally before
changes are made.
* Existing core team members can nominate a new core member at any time,
with a justification sent to the existing core team:
openstack-doc-core@lists.launchpad.net. Three +1 votes from other existing
core team members must be achieved for approval.
Core reviewer responsibilities
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Becoming a core reviewer carries with it a responsibility: you are now the
guardian of the gate, and it is up to the core team to ensure that nothing
unfavorable gets through, without discouraging contributions.
General instructions for being a core reviewer are located in the
`Core Reviewer's Guide
<http://docs.openstack.org/infra/manual/developers.html#code-review>`_.
This section is for openstack-manuals core reviewers.
In almost all cases, patches can be merged with at least one +1 vote, and
two +2 votes. The second +2 vote is usually the one that will also merge the
patch (often referred to as a +2A vote). There are very few exceptions to
this rule within documentation, the main one being extraordinary
circumstances where a patch has broken the build and a fix is required very
quickly. In this case, you should still seek out another core team member
if possible, and make some kind of contact with the PTL so that they are
aware of the problem.
If you are a core team member, but don't feel you understand the subject
matter of a patch well enough to confidently merge it, vote +1 and mention
your reasons. Being overly cautious is better than being overly confident.
Try not to merge a patch too quickly, even if it strictly has the correct
number of votes. Allowing a patch to sit for a couple of days is generally
helpful, in order to ensure enough people have seen the change. It can also
be valuable to add speciality team leads or other subject matter experts
to patches where you feel more specialized knowledge is required to make
a good decision.
A note on review rigor: There are very few guidelines about what a good patch
looks like, but the general approach is that if it's technically accurate and
better than the existing content, then it should be approved. The main things
to look for:
* General spelling and grammar.
* Technical accuracy. Where possible, test commands on your own VM to make
sure they're accurate. Check any related bugs and mailing list conversation
to see if there's anything else you might need to take into account.
* The 'is it better than what we have already' test. Check the diff, or look
at the current document on the doc site, and determine if the changes are
an improvement. Provide corrections in-line for the author to fix if
there's more than a couple of errors. If there's just one or two really
minor changes (or in a situation where the writer has explicitly asked for
editorial assistance), consider checking out the patch and editing it
yourself.
And, as a final note: Be nice. Be helpful. It is your job as a core reviewer
to help people get patches merged, not block them.

View File

@ -5,8 +5,8 @@ OpenStack Documentation Contributor Guide
Abstract
~~~~~~~~
This guide provides detailed instructions on the documentation contribution
workflow and conventions to be considered by all contributors. Please
This guide provides detailed instructions on the contribution workflow and
conventions to be considered by all documentation contributors. Please
follow these guidelines to keep the documentation structure, style, and
syntax consistent.

View File

@ -13,3 +13,31 @@ Many of these types of changes are handled automatically by
``openstack-doc-tools``, and published to the Configuration Reference
and Command-Line Reference. For more information about these automated
tools, see the :ref:`doc-tools` chapter.
If you are contributing documentation to the main openstack-manuals
repository, there are a few things you can do to help your patch merge
quickly and easily:
* Contact your project's documentation `cross-project liaison
<https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/CrossProjectLiaisons#Documentation>`_.
They can help you with finding the appropriate book to add your patch, and
the relevant people to review your patch once you have written it.
* If you are not confident in your written English skills, feel free to
add a note that you are happy to have editorial assistance on the patch.
This will encourage writers to check out your patch and correct any
spelling or grammar mistakes, rather than just adding comments for you
to fix yourself.
* If you know which book you want to modify, get in contact with the
appropriate speciality team, listed at :doc:`../team-structure`. They
can help you determine where the content should live, and also give you
details about upcoming changes to the architecture of those books that
might affect your new documentation.
* If you are intending to make a very large change, such as an entirely
new section or chapter, or documenting a new project, the core team might
ask you to create a blueprint and specification for the change. If you are
unsure whether your change will require a blueprint or specification, ask
on the mailing list for guidance.
* If you want to create a new Installation Tutorial for your big tent
project, see :doc:`../project-install-guide`.
* Remember, you can always contact the documentation team through our mailing
list, or on IRC.

View File

@ -5,7 +5,7 @@ First timers
============
One of the best ways to start contributing to OpenStack documentation
is to walk through the Installation guide and complete it by hand.
is to walk through the Installation Tutorial and complete it by hand.
Keep notes as you go, and offer suggestions for improvement by filing
documentation bugs at Launchpad.

View File

@ -19,11 +19,6 @@ Any configuration options or command line tools should be documented using
the automated ``openstack-doc-tools``. For more information about these
automated tools, see the :ref:`doc-tools` chapter.
To create your Installation documentation in accordance with the OpenStack
Foundation Project Navigator, begin by drafting and polishing it in your
developer documentation repository. This is considered 'official' Installation
documentation for the purposes of the Navigator. Once you have a good amount
of quality content, open a conversation with the openstack-manuals team about
inclusion in the top level documentation directory. The docs team will then be
able to work with you to determine your specific documentation needs, and the
best way to include your project in openstack-manuals.
To create an Installation Tutorial in accordance with the OpenStack
Foundation Project Navigator, follow the instructions at
``project-install-guide``.