Meeting started at 2026-07-14 13:00:11 UTC

The Meeting name is 'Fedora Docs Team Meeting - 2026-07-14'

!hi

Peter Boy (ServerWG, Docs): Peter Boy (pboy)

!hi

!hi

Jocelyn Gould (UTC-4): Jocelyn Gould (korora) - she / her / hers

Petr Bokoc: Petr Bokoč (pbokoc)

!hi

Hristo Marinov: Hristo Marinov (hricky) - he / him / his

!hi

Eli Ridge: Eli Ridge (egret)

I wonder - should I ping the whole docs FAS group at the start of every meeting? It might help us keep it cleaned up if people who don't want to contribute anymore show up and ask to be removed to avoid the pings, hehe

Wouldn't work on people who just left Fedora completely though

I think, yes

!hi

Justin Wheeler: Justin Wheeler (jflory7) - he / him / his

For Server i also put a message atroom

!group members docs

Members of docs: augenauf, copperi, cstrauf, Alix Andrieu, egret, hank L, Hristo Marinov, Stephen Snow, jflory7 (@jflory7:fedora.im, @fca:fedoraproject.org), Jean-Baptiste Holcroft, jonashub, Kevin Fenzi, korora (@korora:fedora.im, @korora1981:matrix.org), laubersm, Anushka Jain, Cornelius Emase, Mateus Rodrigues Costa, Matthew Miller, mjahoda, mpduty, Michael Winters, Petr Bokoč, Peter Boy, P G, pmkovar, Christopher Klooz, sarkajana, sclark, Shaun McCance, Sumantro Mukherjee, Mat H, Freya Gustavsson, x3mboy, Zach Oglesby

!hi

Ro: Rowan Puttergill (goroboro) - he / him / his

7 people, not bad

I don't think I have much to announce. We're working on migrating the last 2 repos that are in pagure, both of them seem to have people willing to take care of them, so it's just a question of actually doing the migration. Later I'll also open issues in all repos that are still on gitlab, but that's less of a priority.

Other than that - anyone have anything?

I think we / you are in the middle of restructuring team-docs, arn't we?

And also, of course, if you have other, non-docs repos in pagure, migrate them by the end of the month please

I approve!

Oh, hmm, announcements

Oh, good point Peter Boy (ServerWG, Docs). I'm Frankensteining the team docs repo right now, there's a PR open from last Friday but I still need to make some changes as Peter suggested. I'll try to get to it when I can, but right now I have 3 hours of meetings back to back in front of me. In the meantime, everyone please avoid starting any work in the team-docs repo because if you do that, you'll end up with the mother of all conflicts.

I got one

Oh, good point Peter Boy (ServerWG, Docs). I'm Frankensteining the team docs repo right now, there's a PR open from last Friday but I still need to make some changes as Peter suggested. I'll try to get to it when I can, but right now I have 3 hours of meetings back to back in front of me, so it probably won't be today. In the meantime, everyone please avoid starting any work in the team-docs repo because if you do that, you'll end up with the mother of all conflicts.

I think that's all I got off-hand anyways 🙂

I imagine the people using GitHub will keep using GitHub though, but I guess that is a use case that Antora also enables

Yeah, those on github are usually there for a reason and I don't think they want to move

Ma-ma-ma-meeeeeeeeerge conflict

Alright, let's move on

I had one, to change PR permissions. Haven't done that yet, my apologies, I'll prioritize it this week

Hristo Marinov, reminder about the proposal for `docsbuilder.sh` :)

Thanks, I'm working on it. Actually there is a progress: https://forge.fedoraproject.org/docs/docs-fp-o/pulls/46.

And looks like RobinSheps isn't here, he volunteered to be the docs lead for one of the SIGs. I'll ping him in the channel later

Ahh, awesome

There were also two others meant for everyone - review the comments in https://forge.fedoraproject.org/docs/tickets/issues/49, and the captain thing. We'll get to that momentarily

I am happy to rep the Captains issue, when it comes up

I'm counting on that :))

Hristo Marinov: PR looks exciting, will be keen to look into it more

Brett: This PR might be something for you to check out when you have time^^

All right, if there isn't anything else, let's get to today's agenda

Basically, we can build the image. I'll update the issue with the proposal. Also will continue the work in https://forge.stg.fedoraproject.org/playground/docs-fp-o-ci-test.

Great, thanks for the info!

Gooooooood moooorning Doooocs!

Alright Justin Wheeler, bring it on :)

And he's gone

Should we circle back to this?

I'm back!

OK, so…

I think a quick summary on status, then a call for action/`!halp` will be enough

Oh, and I have a pitch

Of course, every pirate ship needs a bunch of pitch for hull repairs

I would guess the "team lead" role is optional, but the "sponsor" role would be required.

@qvest was interested in helping out with Multimedia, and I think RobinSheps might have been interested in kernel/booting.

But I think there is room for others to participate, especially any team members who have been around for a while or are strong in a technical writing background

[eof]

Anyone have questions, comments, concerns?

I think the roles of the lead and even the sponsor will sort of taper off after a while - there's going to be a larger amount of upfront work, because most of the SIG leads don't know anything about docs, but as they get into the role I expect they'll be able to operate more independently. So any volunteers should expect that there's going to be a lot to do at first, but it'll get better over time.

Excellent point

Also. Team leads should probably focus on working with a single SIG, while sponsors should be able to sponsor multiple.

I think we could timebox this experiment to F45 release, maybe?

I like this... but it would be really good to have a directory of the topic areas ultimately, and the people responsible for these. That way if someone sees something that might need changing, they know who to reach out to. I know that we can create issues, but sometimes it is worth a natter before opening an issue.

That makes sense generally too, although for the pilot, I think it is ideal that no single person shows up more than once in a pilot team

What do you mean by timeboxing? Starting before F45?

I think creating onboarding guidance for how to contribute, or at least guiding how to contribute a little, would be a great thing for Docs lead to help the Team lead with

Sorry, no, we would end the pilot at F45 and either scale it up and out, or say "well at least we tried"

I do think a general deadline to assess this effort is needed though. That's what I mean by timebox. Otherwise, tickets can easily stretch into eeeettttterrrrnnniiiiittttttyyyyyyyy

Right, okay. And do you mean F45 release or EOL? Because release isn't *that* far away, I'm not sure if it's enough time to be able to tell if it works or not. And EOL (Nov 2027) seems a bit too far away to keep dragging it on if it's clear it's not working.

Release is what I was thinking. That's nearly three months from now. We may decide we need to continue the pilots for longer too, and that's okay

But I feel like we will know enough by F45 if we really want to do this on a bigger scale with more teams

F45 EOL, no way, that's too long :D

Yeah, I guess we can peg it to F45 release for now and then we'll see

That's the sink-or-swim moment, I guess :P

Anyways, if anyone would like to help out with this, with any of the teams… drop a shout! Or… a byte

Too often thinks stay a longer time quite dromant and suddenly start running.

I might be willing to help out with kernel/boot if I can find time...

Do we have any other actions around this?

Great! Drop a comment in the issue please

Nice! Well, the sponsor role might be ideal for someone without too much time. Also, background in the subject matter area definitely helps too but it is not required

Okay, anything else on #50?

I'm set

I can assign myself to this as it is similar to the other issues I'm working on.

Doesn't this tie into some of the mysterious OpenShift builders we have for Docs today?

Okay so, an ongoing problem we have is that the site sometimes fails to build and it does so silently. Someone notices (often days later) but unless they're a regular in #docs:fedoraproject.org, they don't really know who to tell or where to report it, we don't have any documented procedure for this.

Ideally we would have a watchdog connected to OpenShift that 1) starts screeching in our room like the Skull of Regret, and 2) publishes the error log, which is currently only visible to like... me and darknao, because they're in openshift. Without the log it's really hard to figure out what's wrong.

Now, the ticket also mentions reporting procedures, but I'm thinking - if we have automated monitoring, then there's no reason to document a reporting procedure, because it'll happen automatically

We could do it as a stopgap measure I guess, but... meh

Yeah, if you want to handle this too, that would be awesome. I was thinking of you but I didn't want to heap more on your plate, it's plenty full already :)

We can set up a CI in Forge which builds the entire site either on a PR or on a schedule or both.

A doc page on what to do when everything fails or isn't building might be nice generally, but getting automatic alerting and publishing the error logs would be nice

I'd love to see the error logs for the actual production site build. there is a lot of small stuff which simply can just be fixed

I fixed a ton in Mentored Projects when I realized from some other log that it was generating SO MANY ERRORS

The alerts are already in place I think. Given the PR I mentioned earlier.

They exist already, or will exist after the PR is merged?

Already exist. See the Docs room. When a container build fails it is visible in the room. So obviously it is set.

It looks like this: `Containerfile: Disable chunkah at build time Action Failed in docs/docs-fp-o #46`.

Oh I see, nice!

Building the site based on when content actually gets merged `==` ❤️

The openshift logs aren't useful for that, they don't give you the errors that you get when building locally with docsbuilder - I guess the site builder has error reporting set to a different level (I haven't checked but that's gotta be it). So it doesn't report broken xrefs, missing images, etc., just whatever caused the process to terminate.

This is what it looks like

It should be the same for the entire site, I'll test that, but first I'll ask some more question in the room.

Oh, interesting, I see

Need any help on things for now? Or just an update on progress?

Looks like things are moving steadily

Feel free to ask for help with a `!halp`

Looking at the OpenShift logs, there is a failure actually om lines 87-89.

i3 SIG docs?

The one I posted? Yeah, it's from an older failure, I wanted to show what an error looks like

It's fine now, I don't know what happened there but it's from Jul 11

Okay so, anything else on #53? We're running out of time

Now, we only have 5 minutes left, and this isn't just one issue, it's a whole bunch of them. So I'm just gonna ask everyone to take a look and if you see something you want to work on, grab it, or at least comment if you have ideas. This is going to be a really big project.

There's a whole project board at https://forge.fedoraproject.org/docs/quick-docs/projects/508

If people also have ideas for kinds or types of improvements they would like, feedback in the issue is appreciated

I think by necessity, we have to break it down into smaller pieces

The UI/UX of the entire site is sorta huge 🙂

It's an epic Epic

But even if you aren't ready to jump in or CSS isn't your thing, drop some ideas and thoughts in the ticket

It will be useful for brainstorming later, when someone does have capacity to work on a piece of this

If anyone has anything else to bring up, type fast, we have 1 minute left :-D

Okay, thank you for coming everyone, and I'll see you over in #docs:fedoraproject.org!