Meeting Log | Ansible Docs | 2024-04-30 15:01:35

[MeetingBot (Ansible Meeting Log Bot)]

DawGs aka Documentation Working Group | Ansible Docs | #docs:ansible.com

Meeting started by @samccann:ansible.im at 2024-04-30 15:01:35

Meeting summary

1. TOPIC: Triage (@samccann:ansible.im, 15:03:59)
1. INFO: what do we want to do for continuing docs for Ansible 9 after Ansible 10 releases - https://github.com/ansible/ansible-documentation/issues/1273 (@samccann:ansible.im, 15:04:39)
2. INFO: general agreement that we should include 9 in the version switcher for the duration of Ansible 9 longer release (@samccann:ansible.im, 15:13:24)
3. LINK: https://github.com/ansible/ansible-documentation/issues/1360 (@samccann:ansible.im, 15:16:06)
2. TOPIC: Documentation Updates (@samccann:ansible.im, 15:20:28)
1. LINK: https://github.com/ansible/ansible-documentation/pulls?q=is%3Apr+is%3Aopen+label%3A%22MUNI+tech+writers%22 (@orandon:ansible.im, 15:22:25)
2. INFO: pr reviews welcome so we can get these student contributions merged on time! (@samccann:ansible.im, 15:22:44)
3. LINK: https://github.com/ansible-community/community-team/issues/516 (@orandon:ansible.im, 15:23:44)
4. INFO: I've been putting some details about requirements and suggestions for the workflow in that issue. feel free to read or comment. (@orandon:ansible.im, 15:24:16)
5. LINK: here is a recent workflow run from my fork: https://github.com/oraNod/ansible-documentation/actions/runs/8885006646 (@orandon:ansible.im, 15:25:32)
6. LINK: here is an experimental repo that I've used as a destination for the push: https://github.com/oraNod/ansible-docs-deploy (@orandon:ansible.im, 15:28:38)
7. INFO: Q1: I propose that we create a new target repo that the workflow pushes into in the `ansible-community` org. Does anyone think that sounds like a good or bad idea? (@orandon:ansible.im, 15:33:15)
8. INFO: Q2: I also propose that we use the `ansible` alias in ReadTheDocs so that we end up with `ansible.readthedocs.io/projects/ansible` to match the current url context `docs.ansible.com/ansible`. Any considerations there or better ideas? (@orandon:ansible.im, 15:35:59)
9. INFO: Q3: As a future effort, after we get things set up on RTD, propose that we add a workflow step that pushes to a `gh-pages` branch in the new repo that we’ll use to replace `docs.testing.ansible.com`. This keeps prod on RTD and test on GH pages. Does that sound reasonable? (@orandon:ansible.im, 15:41:34)
10. INFO: general agreement on Q1 and Q2 (using ansible-community to host new artifact repo and projects/ansible for the RTD structure (@samccann:ansible.im, 15:45:57)
11. INFO: A3 sure let's use github pages for our replacement test/staging site, blocked from google so it won't compete with the real thing (@samccann:ansible.im, 15:46:34)
12. INFO: Q4: Do we want to add the package docs build as a PR check? That would give us more coverage than the `docs-build` which just covers core docs but would take >30 mins to run. (@orandon:ansible.im, 15:48:49)
13. AGREED: keep full package docs build as a separate workflow not part of CI tests, but extend current CI tests to include all RST files to broaden scope of testing (@samccann:ansible.im, 15:55:50)
3. TOPIC: Open Floor (@samccann:ansible.im, 15:56:21)
1. ACTION: need to restore the umask note to setting up docs local builds (@samccann:ansible.im, 16:00:34)
2. ACTION: open issue on ansible/ansible for the spell check problems in the docs build (@samccann:ansible.im, 16:01:57)
3. INFO: if we move ansible-documentation repo, we should move ansible/docsite as well as that holds the 'front pages'. (@samccann:ansible.im, 16:05:23)

Meeting ended at 2024-04-30 16:06:17

Action items

1. need to restore the umask note to setting up docs local builds
2. open issue on ansible/ansible for the spell check problems in the docs build

People present (lines said)

1. @samccann:ansible.im (77)
2. @orandon:ansible.im (47)
3. @acozine:ansible.im (18)
4. @utoddl:matrix.org (7)
5. @ansibot:ansible.im (2)
6. @tvo318:matrix.org (1)

Full logs: full_log.txt