incubator-cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sebastien Goasguen <run...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DOCS][DISCUSS]Documentation for 4.1
Date Wed, 13 Feb 2013 16:50:22 GMT

On Feb 12, 2013, at 8:30 PM, Chip Childers <chip.childers@sungard.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 10:54:42AM -0600, Joe Brockmeier wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 05:25:11PM +0100, Sebastien Goasguen wrote:
>>> After 2/28 we will just fix doc bugs, not add new docs, even if a feature
>>> is included in 4.1 if its docs are not in by 2/28 then too bad.
>> 
>> -1 to this.
>> 
>> The reason for stopping feature development with a hard freeze is that
>> new features have the potential to disrupt the codebase badly enough
>> that it's a major issue.
>> 
>> Adding new docs makes it a problem for translators, but it doesn't carry
>> the same level of disruption as new features. For example, think about
>> the impact if Javelin landed a week later than it did into master vs.
>> the impact of adding another section to the install or admin guide. It's
>> not really comparable. 
>> 
>> Also - leaving a feature out of a release means it can be picked up in a
>> later release. Failing to document features is, basically, a bug that
>> should be fixed (if possible) before a release. 
>> 
> 
> Unless that feature's lack of documentation effectively just means that
> it's not used (but available).
> 
>>> That's a bit of tough love, but that's what will happen if we want to 
>>> stick to the schedule.
>> 
>> I'd like to stick to the schedule, but we should have more flexibility
>> here than with features. It's also worth noting this is the first
>> time through with a hard feature release and we're still finding our way
>> - and what we seem to be finding is that ~1 month for documentation is a
>> bit tricky when a lot of features land (or don't) right on the feature
>> deadline. 
> 
> I actually agree with Joe for 4.1.0.  Right up until 2013-03-22, but
> only as a way to give our docs folks a bit more time to catch up.  The
> more that's done earlier the better.  The implication of this is that
> our translations will suffer (i.e., not be done).  
> 
> We could have a post-release translation update planned, since the 
> published docs site doesn't have to be part of a release officially.
> BTW, do we have anything beyond en-US published to the website anyway?
> If not, we should!
> 
> All that being said, I think that we need to work out a better schedule / plan for the

> next feature release.  I think back to the discussions about the schedule, 
> and a general desire to consider "done" for a feature as meaning "coded, 
> tested, documented".  Perhaps that has to become the criteria for next time?

I am fine with this, but I'd like to see the schedule updated (otherwise it becomes meaningless).
It's not an issue of translations, it's really an issue of procedure and schedule.

On the docs release, I think we need to have yet another thread :(. Docs code is part of a
release, but we may get updates prior to a bug fix release. It would be good to be able to
release new docs continuously. ( Jessica had started a thread about this).

-sebastien


> 
>> 
>> Best,
>> 
>> jzb
>> --
>> Joe Brockmeier
>> http://dissociatedpress.net/
>> Twitter: @jzb
>> 


Mime
View raw message