18:30:28 <bcotton> #startmeeting docs
18:30:28 <zodbot> Meeting started Wed Jun  8 18:30:28 2022 UTC.
18:30:28 <zodbot> This meeting is logged and archived in a public location.
18:30:28 <zodbot> The chair is bcotton. Information about MeetBot at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Zodbot#Meeting_Functions.
18:30:28 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
18:30:28 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'docs'
18:30:31 <bcotton> #chair pboy darknao
18:30:31 <zodbot> Current chairs: bcotton darknao pboy
18:30:35 <bcotton> #topic Roll call
18:30:39 * bcotton waits for zodbot to catch up
18:30:39 <pboy> .hi
18:30:40 <zodbot> pboy: pboy 'Peter Boy' <pboy@uni-bremen.de>
18:30:40 <darknao> .hi
18:30:43 <zodbot> darknao: darknao 'Francois Andrieu' <darknao@drkn.ninja>
18:30:47 <py0xc3[m]> .hi
18:30:48 <zodbot> py0xc3[m]: Sorry, but user 'py0xc3 [m]' does not exist
18:31:03 <bcotton> yay, the bridge is slow today :-)
18:31:21 <MateusRCosta[m]> .hi
18:31:22 <zodbot> MateusRCosta[m]: Sorry, but user 'MateusRCosta [m]' does not exist
18:31:42 <MateusRCosta[m]> .hi mateusrodcosta
18:31:43 <zodbot> MateusRCosta[m]: Sorry, but user 'MateusRCosta [m]' does not exist
18:32:00 <MateusRCosta[m]> I think I shoudln't have edited my display name =\
18:32:23 <pboy> Maybe, but the cause is probably the bridge
18:32:44 <py0xc3[m]> I have to work in parallel, so Im likely to be mostly an observer today :)
18:32:52 <MateusRCosta[m]> Oh, I have an idea, brb
18:32:53 <pboy> And just a gentle sugestion: Make it shorter. :-)
18:33:05 <pboy> (sorry,just an idea)
18:34:10 <pboy> #info Mateus and me discussed about migration of the Administrator's Guide. He will join us in that work, probably starting with the dnf part.
18:34:18 <bcotton> py0xc3: i live my life in parallel :-(
18:34:21 <darknao> MateusRCosta[m]: you can use .hello <your_fas_name> instead
18:34:28 <bcotton> #topic Agenda
18:34:33 <MateusRCosta[m]> .hello mateusrodcosta
18:34:34 <zodbot> MateusRCosta[m]: mateusrodcosta 'Mateus Rodrigues Costa' <mateusrodcosta@gmail.com>
18:34:36 <bcotton> #info Review action items
18:34:36 <bcotton> #info Revitalization status
18:34:42 <bcotton> #info GitLab followup
18:34:42 <bcotton> #info Open floor
18:34:46 <bcotton> #topic Announcements
18:34:52 <bcotton> #info F34 reached EOL yesterday
18:35:01 <bcotton> #action bcotton to close F34 release notes issues
18:35:13 <bcotton> #help Some F36 release notes still need written: https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/how-to-write-fedora-release-notes/38311
18:35:19 <bcotton> #info We're using the docs-fp-o repo to track meta-work
18:35:20 <bcotton> #link https://pagure.io/fedora-docs/docs-fp-o/issues
18:35:29 <bcotton> any other announcements?
18:36:38 <bcotton> #topic Previous action items
18:36:46 <bcotton> #info pbokoc to finally add a relnotes guide to the contributor docs
18:36:50 <bcotton> #action pbokoc to finally add a relnotes guide to the contributor docs
18:37:04 <bcotton> #info [DONE] bcotton to share office hours post on cloud, devel, desktop, iot, kde, mindshare, server mailing lists
18:37:14 <bcotton> #info darknao to find out if we can use SAML groups on Fedora Docs GitLab group and still grant additional access to individual repositories
18:37:18 <bcotton> (will come back to this in the GitLab section)
18:37:32 <bcotton> #info darknao to configure the docs repos in GitLab with CI to run builds on MRs (we can add additional checks later)
18:37:33 <bcotton> (ditto)
18:37:39 <bcotton> #info [DONE] bcotton to start discussion of how to handle the Release Notes repo move
18:37:40 <bcotton> #link https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/migrating-the-release-notes-repo/39679/2
18:37:46 <bcotton> #topic Revitalization status
18:37:46 <bcotton> #link https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/a-brief-resume-2-months-after-the-revitalization-session/38795/
18:37:51 <bcotton> #link https://hackmd.io/ZIrWEjFKQEW7GdU0aonofw
18:37:51 <bcotton> #link https://pagure.io/fedora-docs/docs-fp-o/issue/189
18:40:11 <bcotton> i like the draft that pboy put together (the hackmd link)
18:40:27 <pboy> thanks :-)
18:40:38 <bcotton> i'm not sold on the "who we are" as a general principle, but i think it's well-executed here
18:40:45 <bcotton> and the what we are working on is really good
18:41:05 <pboy> From my PoV we should start to reshape our standing.
18:41:27 <pboy> We can leave off the who we are part at he beginning.
18:41:55 <pboy> But sooner or later we must do somethink about it.
18:42:23 <bcotton> agreed
18:43:10 <py0xc3[m]> I think its good to know who can be asked about what when getting into the docs, so for new people. So I think that is valuable.
18:43:52 <darknao> I'm fine with the Who we are part, but maybe we can remove the "currently working on" line
18:44:02 <py0xc3[m]> When I looked into the docs initially, it was hard to determine that. You had to get through discussions to roughly identify who is doing what and such. So I like the part
18:44:45 <bcotton> without getting too deep into it, i think the "lead" under each of the "what we're working on" covers py0xc3's point well and avoids the "oops, our docs aren't reality anymore" part
18:45:39 <bcotton> And if we make those links to people's individual wiki pages (or other URL of their choosing), it's easy enough to find out more about the members of the team
18:45:56 <pboy> darknao just leaving off that line or the complete section?
18:46:05 <darknao> just the line
18:46:39 <py0xc3[m]> bcotton: Agreed :)
18:46:39 <darknao> to me, it sounds like "I'm currently busy with xx task, so don't ask me anything" :p
18:47:03 <pboy> darknao that would be a bad message
18:47:07 <pboy> indeed
18:47:29 <darknao> and the same information is already in the Ongoing working project section below
18:47:35 <py0xc3[m]> darknao: Mine was "if you have a question about that, ask the leader", but I like your interpretation too xD
18:47:48 <pboy> my intention was Make everything tangible
18:49:19 <bcotton> it's a good intention
18:49:21 <pboy> What about the Who we are section with name/link and just first line about activity focus
18:49:30 <bcotton> i think what we have now is Good Enough™ to start with. we can always make edits later
18:49:49 <darknao> pboy: yes that's perfect
18:49:55 <bcotton> and no one has raised any serious objections in the 2+ weeks since the hackmd doc was first shared
18:50:46 <pboy> Well, do we agree to start woth it?
18:51:02 <bcotton> ship it!
18:51:24 <darknao> +1
18:51:36 <pboy> I can convert it into adoc, who does put it online?
18:52:01 <bcotton> pboy: you can just put it in the repo no?
18:52:17 <pboy> I don't know, do i have the permissions?
18:52:49 <bcotton> you should. it's in https://gitlab.com/fedora/docs/community-tools/documentation-contributors-guide/-/edit/main/modules/ROOT/pages/index.adoc
18:53:05 <pboy> OK, than I'll do it.
18:53:33 <pboy> My gitlab account does work now.
18:53:46 <bcotton> great
18:54:01 <bcotton> #action pboy to update the docs team page with his revised content
18:54:52 <pboy> I made some amendment to my original post.
18:54:56 <bcotton> two other points that peter mentioned in the Discussion thread that I want to bring up on this topic, not necessarily to answer today but soon
18:55:13 <bcotton> 1. finding a longer-term team lead
18:55:18 <bcotton> 2. submitting a Nest talk
18:55:48 <bcotton> i can help with #2, but I have some family obligations that will keep me from having the time to take the lead on it
18:56:06 <pboy> Yes, a bit more generic: providing a plausible structure.
18:56:20 <bcotton> for #1, I can keep running the meetings for a while, but my hope when we started was that we'd get the ball rolling and then i slide into a "just another contributor" role :-)
18:56:27 <pboy> e.G. "editorial board", which can be a small group of 6 -8
18:56:40 <bcotton> right. that also maps to our new gitlab groups :-)
18:56:54 <pboy> And an authors circle, which can plausible larger number
18:57:15 <pboy> and "technical fire fighters" or something like that. :-)
18:57:52 <pboy> So, we can ==plausible== act with a small group as a permantent institution
18:58:41 <mateusrc> You guys are trying right now to figure out how to structure the members?
18:58:42 <mateusrc> Maybe somthing like "Board", "Writers", "Reviewers" and another one for the members that can come and go?
18:59:16 <pboy> mateusrc. yes, that's the moint
18:59:19 <pboy> point
18:59:41 <pboy> members that can plausible come and go and com back, ...
19:00:20 <bcotton> so given: https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/fedora-docs-gitlab-permissions/39545/10 i think we should have three "tiers" (for lack of a better term). the core group/editorial board (docs-admin), regular contributors (docs), and casual contributors (anyone with a Fedora account)
19:00:46 <bcotton> making our structure match the tooling gives us the simplest approach, imo
19:00:57 <pboy> bcotton ++
19:01:48 <bcotton> so then the question becomes how do we grant (and remove!) membership in those tiers
19:01:53 <mateusrc> bcotton: Then... Would it translate to GitLab's "Admin", "Commiter", "Reviewer" and "Reporter" permissions on repos?
19:02:31 <bcotton> docs-admin -> Admin, docs -> developer
19:03:19 <mateusrc> Ah, got it!
19:03:29 <darknao> regular contributors can commit directly in the repo, other contributors must go through the PR workflow
19:04:39 <pboy> About granting membership: Currently it is a matter of facts. we are 4 steady participant over 3 months. And we should ask pbokoc. And probably those who at least participated more than once.
19:05:16 <pboy> maybe we should inform council because of Legitimacy for startup?
19:05:33 <pboy> And later the board decides / votes
19:05:54 <bcotton> that's not required. we could run it by Mindshare if we want an independent stamp of approval
19:06:15 <pboy> OK, mindshare fine, too
19:06:26 <bcotton> i think what we need is a concrete proposal, even if the first draft is terrible
19:06:33 <bcotton> i can take that unless someone really wants to
19:06:44 <bcotton> (basically writing a Docs team charter)
19:06:53 <pboy> bcotton +1
19:07:35 <pboy> Can we action you?  :-)
19:07:38 <py0xc3[m]> +1
19:08:13 <bcotton> #action bcotton to draft Docs Team Charter
19:08:29 <bcotton> i'm not wearing my "#action bcotton" t-shirt today, but it's always there in spirit
19:09:59 <bcotton> now does anyone want to volunteer to do the Nest talk :-)
19:11:03 <pboy> I’m not familiar with it. But I can contribute from the "second row".
19:11:29 <pboy> Blantly spoken, I don't nothing about it.
19:12:01 <py0xc3[m]> What does Nest talk relate to?
19:12:37 <bcotton> Basically a "What we've done to restart the Docs team and what we are going to do (and how you can help!)"
19:13:18 <pboy> is it a specific event, a yearly event or so ?
19:13:43 <bcotton> It's the online version of our annual Flock to Fedora contributor conference
19:13:49 <py0xc3[m]> Generally, I can support. Let me know with what. But to do the whole thing I think I am still not sufficiently "deep into the docs"
19:14:48 <pboy> OK, so we need / should register a contribution?
19:15:15 <bcotton> the pool of people who are sufficiently involved is small, so we may have to give up on the idea of doing a talk
19:15:32 <bcotton> https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/nest-2022-cfp/
19:17:59 <bcotton> okay, anything else on this for now or should we check in on the gitlab status real quick?
19:18:06 <py0xc3[m]> bcotton: However, we can make it a goal to participate next year :) That's something to work against. But for know I would say the list of people for that is small, as you say
19:19:46 <bcotton> #topic GitLab migration
19:19:46 <bcotton> #link https://pagure.io/fedora-docs/docs-fp-o/boards/GitLab%20migration
19:19:48 <pboy> The maximum we could do is a 25 min session. But it is a bit short now, so the idea with next year seems better to me
19:21:04 <bcotton> so there's my open question about the release notes repo. i'm pretty sure the quick docs repo didn't get a migration card either. that one seems like it's worth doing a "hackfest" to tackle issues/PRs before we move. but we could move docs-fp-o without waiting for it and start getting the benefits of the cross-repo boards
19:22:52 <pboy> What do you mean with quickdoc "didn't get a migration card"?
19:23:04 <darknao> you mean this https://pagure.io/fedora-docs/docs-fp-o/issue/243 ?
19:23:12 <bcotton> i didn't open an issue to migrate it
19:23:19 <bcotton> OH! I did open one
19:23:24 <bcotton> okay
19:23:44 <bcotton> i was thinking i skipped it like i did the release-notes repo
19:25:53 <pboy> Indeed, we shour address the quick doc issues first.
19:25:58 <darknao> so yeah, an hackfest sounds like a good idea. We could also migrate the issues to gitlab. I'm pretty sure we already have a script for that somewhere
19:26:24 <bcotton> yea,h ryan (iirc) shared one that an intern wrote last year
19:27:20 <bcotton> i'd love to do a hackfest, but i think copying the issues might be the easier approach. or at least more likely to happen in the short term
19:27:44 <darknao> we can do both :)
19:28:54 <bcotton> true!
19:29:25 <bcotton> okay, anything else in our last minute?
19:29:49 <darknao> nothing from me
19:29:57 <pboy> nope
19:30:18 <py0xc3[m]> nope
19:30:39 <bcotton> #info reminder that we're doing office hours again at 1900 UTC in #fedora-meeting-2
19:30:42 <bcotton> thanks, everyone!
19:30:44 <bcotton> #endmeeting