# Requesting auto-tagging for the DaWGs meeting logs **URL:** \ **Category:** Forum Guide & Feedback\ **Tags:** documentation\ **Created:** [December 5, 2023, 5:02pm UTC](https://forum.ansible.com/t/requesting-auto-tagging-for-the-dawgs-meeting-logs/2759 "2023-12-05T17:02:00Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 8\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![samccann](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/ansible/user_avatar/forum.ansible.com/samccann/32/18_2.png) [@samccann](https://forum.ansible.com/u/samccann)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2023, 5:02pm UTC](https://forum.ansible.com/t/requesting-auto-tagging-for-the-dawgs-meeting-logs/2759/1 "2023-12-05T17:02:00Z")
Going to ping @gotmax23 and @oranod for opinions before we do this, but I’d like for background magic to autotag the documentation meeting logs like I think @Leo implemented for the community WG meeting. I’ve been manually adding the `documentation` and `meeting` tags to each one. Is this the set of tags we want? Do we need a separate `documentation-wg` tag? I’m inclined to say no, but wanted other opinions before the background magic happens… ---
**Author:** ![gotmax23](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/ansible/user_avatar/forum.ansible.com/gotmax23/32/106_2.png) [@gotmax23](https://forum.ansible.com/u/gotmax23)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2023, 5:17pm UTC](https://forum.ansible.com/t/requesting-auto-tagging-for-the-dawgs-meeting-logs/2759/2 "2023-12-05T17:17:56Z")
We have separate #community and #community-wg tags, which I think works well for us. #community is for general community discussions in all forum categories, and #community-wg is used to tag topics for the steering committee to discuss or vote on and is only available in #Project Discussions. I find this separation of concerns really helpful, but I’m not sure if it’s as applicable to the Docs Working Group. Either way, I’d be fine with autotagging logs with #meeting and #documentation or #docs-wg (#documentation-wg may be too long for Discourse) ---
**Author:** ![Leo](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/ansible/user_avatar/forum.ansible.com/leo/32/23_2.png) [@Leo](https://forum.ansible.com/u/Leo)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2023, 8:13pm UTC](https://forum.ansible.com/t/requesting-auto-tagging-for-the-dawgs-meeting-logs/2759/3 "2023-12-05T20:13:46Z")
We are currently using the working group tag only (for `#community-wg` and `#network` for ex.). The standalone `#community` tag was a bit too general for the WG use case like @gotmax23 mentioned, but maybe for [@Docs](https://forum.ansible.com/groups/docs) the `#documentation` one works. I haven’t set up the additional `#meeting` or `#meeting-logs` for auto-tagging, but it can be done with a second rule if you need both. I’m still not sure we need one of those for logs due to them having a specific #MeetingBot Logs category ---
**Author:** ![samccann](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/ansible/user_avatar/forum.ansible.com/samccann/32/18_2.png) [@samccann](https://forum.ansible.com/u/samccann)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2023, 9:18pm UTC](https://forum.ansible.com/t/requesting-auto-tagging-for-the-dawgs-meeting-logs/2759/4 "2023-12-07T21:18:21Z")
Yeah let’s try just autotagging with `documentation` and see how it goes, thanks! ---
**Author:** ![samccann](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/ansible/user_avatar/forum.ansible.com/samccann/32/18_2.png) [@samccann](https://forum.ansible.com/u/samccann)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2023, 4:59pm UTC](https://forum.ansible.com/t/requesting-auto-tagging-for-the-dawgs-meeting-logs/2759/5 "2023-12-12T16:59:36Z")
urm… autotagging just tagged the DaWGs meeting as awx? > [@Meeting Log | Ansible Docs | 2023-12-12 16:00:40](http://forum.ansible.com/t/meeting-log-ansible-docs-2023-12-12-1640/2871): > > Documentation aka DaWGS meeting | Ansible Docs | #docs:ansible.com Meeting started by @samccann:ansible.im at 2023-12-12 16:00:40 Meeting summary TOPIC: google search console enablement (@samccann:ansible.im, 16:05:52) INFO: request to add google search console enablement to the new ecosystem docsite https://github.com/ansible/ecosystem-documentation/issues/19 (@samccann:ansible.im, 16:06:17) INFO: this … ---
**Author:** ![gwmngilfen](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/ansible/user_avatar/forum.ansible.com/gwmngilfen/32/6_2.png) [@gwmngilfen](https://forum.ansible.com/u/gwmngilfen)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2023, 5:21pm UTC](https://forum.ansible.com/t/requesting-auto-tagging-for-the-dawgs-meeting-logs/2759/6 "2023-12-12T17:21:21Z")
Because it has “AWX” in the body, and we have a rule for that. I don’t think the documentation auto-tag rule has been set up yet ---
**Author:** ![Leo](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/ansible/user_avatar/forum.ansible.com/leo/32/23_2.png) [@Leo](https://forum.ansible.com/u/Leo)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2023, 3:42am UTC](https://forum.ansible.com/t/requesting-auto-tagging-for-the-dawgs-meeting-logs/2759/7 "2023-12-22T03:42:26Z")
> [@samccann](#): > > Yeah let’s try just autotagging with `documentation` and see how it goes, thanks! Done! sorry I let this one slide earlier! Good catch @gwmngilfen > [@samccann](#): > > urm… autotagging just tagged the DaWGs meeting as awx? Yeah, one of the problems with the auto tagging is it’s not great on features, it doesn’t have filters or conditionals. It’ s simply " if this word appears, tag with this ". In my opinion, the most popular topics (awx, windows, kubernetes, fedora, ubuntu, etc.) which weren’ t being tagged properly, made sense to have, even if we had some false-positives from time to time. If AWX was discussed in the meeting I think it’ s ok (and actually good) to have it tagged as such. ---
**Author:** ![gwmngilfen](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/ansible/user_avatar/forum.ansible.com/gwmngilfen/32/6_2.png) [@gwmngilfen](https://forum.ansible.com/u/gwmngilfen)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2023, 9:26am UTC](https://forum.ansible.com/t/requesting-auto-tagging-for-the-dawgs-meeting-logs/2759/8 "2023-12-22T09:26:25Z")
> [@Leo](#): > > If AWX was discussed in the meeting I think it’ s ok (and actually good) to have it tagged as such. I agree with this - if the meeting discussed AWX then folks who are interested in AWX should be made aware. I doubt that’s likely to get too noisy, and knowing what topics came up in a meeting is useful.