Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2024 06:04:46 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <1781554960.1727.1710828286440@aws-us-west-2-tungsten-confluence-1.web.codeaurora.org>
Subject: Exported From Confluence
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/related;
boundary="----=_Part_1726_1486858258.1710828286440"
------=_Part_1726_1486858258.1710828286440
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Location: file:///C:/exported.html
2019-04-10 Docs WG Meeting notes
2019-04-10 Docs WG Meeting notes
Date
Attendees
Agenda
Minutes
- Action items
- Notes from last week
- List of docs from all over the place (thank you, Kieran Milne)
- KM's suggestions for moving forward
- Community-created/-maintained
- Leverage Contrail docs
- Use fully Juniper docs
- VM: Start with Contrail docs, move to TF repo
- WS: May not need to import history of Contrail docs
- KM: Tooling for the Contrail docs conversion is at least a year old
- KM: Also will need to rebrand the docs to TF and re-link the topic page=
s
- KM: Over time, Juniper content will be more than just TF
- VM: TF docs will be source of truth, won't need another dump of docs; J=
uniper will start contributing to TF docs instead
- KM: May need more resources to make stuff happen on Juniper side
- VM: May be able to get an assist from Progmatic if needed?
- PTL update
- Issue tracking
- How did we used to do that? (no one has prior experience w/docs bugs)=
li>
- Should get pono's input
- WS: On another project, users don't notice the Jira and instead use Git=
Hub since that's what they see
- KM w/a summary of how the Juniper team is using Jira for new features &=
amp; doc bugs
- Jira for new features (story isn't complete until docs are complete)
- GNATS for doc bugs
- lf-docs
- Other projects use Read The Docs, should we?
- Folks are +1 to assuming we'll use Read The Docs
- pono may have more info on this
- Next steps=E2=80=A6?
Action items
------=_Part_1726_1486858258.1710828286440--