Tag Archives: openstack

community techpubs work writing

Influencing community documentation contributions

After a week with leaders in the OpenStack community, taking leadership training, I’m inspired to write up ideas from Influencer: The New Science of Leading Change. For me, who needs to make the most out of community efforts, the idea that no one likes being told what to do was a familiar phrase. Rather, compel people to pick up your vision and add to it.

As an example, people often ask me, how do you motivate people to write documentation for open source projects? Or write for any software project?


Get details about the behavior you want to see

Using the framework this book offers, you first want to identify the behavior you want to see. Their examples often revolve around healthcare, such as hand washing. But you can get very specific about hand washing, such as where, when, and how. For documentation, you may say the behavior is “write” but I want to get more specific than that. Where should they write? Is the behavior “write a personal blog post?” Or is it “write in the official docs?”

Also, when should they write? Ideally as close to when the technical detail is still fresh as possible. The “when” could be at the end of a cycle when people are less distracted by feature additions. Or write documentation before the code is written and revise it often.

As for “how” do we want contributors to write, well, we may need to have templates and frameworks for the “how” — such as source formats, build jobs, and in which repo.

Looking at the behavior we want to see, getting super detailed about it, we find that we also want to encourage the behavior of code reviewers to read and review related docs.

Identify a crucial moment

Now, when a bit of code changes that makes a difference in the docs, that’s a crucial moment for influencing a particular behavior. The behavior we want to see is writing documentation while the code is fresh in your mind.CC Jonathan Cohen

Another crucial moment to engage is when a user first tries the feature; their fresh eyes may provide an update to the docs that others might not see. The “Edit on GitHub” feature of creating a pull request provides that outlet for fresh eyes to make a quick edit to the documentation.

So we have an idea of the behaviors we want to see, and a sense of when we want to see them. Now we can begin to ask what’s preventing the behavior.

Why don’t people contribute?

Let’s talk about: what’s painful about writing documentation? For example, if you speak English as a second language, it may be painful to write for others to review and the criticism might be more than you can bear. Kind, empathetic coaching, respect, and a culture of acceptance helps with this barrier.

Provide guidance and energy

Also, people associate boredom with docs. They look at a blank screen and can’t come up with words to describe their feature. They yawn and check their Twitter feed instead of writing docs. This pain point is where templates can help. People who don’t know what to write might need guidance, suggestions, or strict form-based templates.

Avoid context switches

It’s painful to have a doc tool set that’s extremely different from what you write code in — the context switch even to a web-based editor may be too big a barrier to jump over. Make the docs like code whenever you need to compel developers to write.

Get some influencers who believe in the vision

Without actual peer pressure that says “yes, we write the docs” developers may not create a culture that requires documentation. Start with the influencers in their peer group (which might not be you). For example, when a seed researcher wants to introduce a new hybrid seed corn, he goes straight to the local diner where the most experienced and influential farmer gets breakfast on Saturdays. It’s better to have the farmer in his pickup truck understand and believe in the benefit of changing to a new hybrid seed corn than for the researcher in his late-model Volvo.

Offer deliberate practice sessions

Also consider “deliberate practice” where you set aside time to get better at a skill. If the skill is writing, then have office hours or coaching sessions online, and at conferences make sure you can meet with people who want to become better writers to show them how to practice writing through drills, exercises, and with fun collaborative efforts such as doc sprints. Record a video or host an online hangout, showing all the steps for contributing deliberately and strategically.

Thanks to many coworkers who helped me discuss and think more about these ideas along the way. What are some additional ways to influence a desired outcome?


The journey is the reward

cc-by-2.0I’m re-reading Playing Big: Find Your Voice, Your Mission, Your Message by Tara Mohr. I’m at a certain transition point in my career journey which is taking me to a new role, a new team, and a new company. Reading Playing Big gives me a new framework, separate from Lean In, to think about how women shape careers and journey through life. And my journey has been and continues to be a great one: after a lot of consideration, I’m taking a compelling new opportunity at Cisco.

Rackspace has been a wonderful home for over five years, and I want to dive even deeper into developer experience: developer tools, outreach, and support (including docs, naturally). I want to study developer workloads for OpenStack infrastructure. I’m super excited for the amount of learning I can do at Cisco by joining their cloud group. I’ll still be working on OpenStack upstream and looking for ways to apply what I learn.

I write about it here so you can observe the transition not just on LinkedIn or Twitter, but also as a transition from tech writer to something new. I have a compelling journey to define.

techpubs writing

Treat Docs like Code: Doc Bugs and Issues

This is a follow on to a post on opensource.com about using git and GitHub for technical documentation. In the OpenSource.com article, I discuss reviews and keeping up with contributions. This post talks about fixes and patches.


What about doc issues in GitHub, how do you get through all those?

In OpenStack, we document how to triage doc bugs, and that’s what you need to do in GitHub, is establish your process for incoming issues. Use Labels in GitHub to indicate the status and priority. Basically, you have to accept that it’s a doc bug, if it’s not a doc bug, ask for more information from the reporter. If you want to create labels for particular deliverables, like the API doc or end-user doc, you can further organize your doc issues. You will need to define priorities as well — what’s critical and must be fixed? What’s more “wishlist” and you’ll get to it when you can? If you use similar systems for both issues and pull requests you’ll have your work prioritized for you when you look at the GitHub backlog.

How can you encourage contributors to create a good pull request for docs?

The best answer for this is “documentation” but also great onboarding. Make sure someone’s first pull request is handled well with a personal touch. There’s a lot of coaching going on when you do reviews. Ensure that you’ve written up “What goes where” as this is often the hardest part of doc maintenance for a large body of work that already exists. This expansion problem is only getting harder in OpenStack as more projects are added. We’re having a lot of documentation sessions at the OpenStack Summit this week and we’d love to talk more about creating good doc patches.

One person I work with uses GitHub emojis every chance he gets when he reviews pull requests. I think that’s fun and sets a nice tone for reviews.

Nitpicking can be averted if you point to your style guide and conventions with a good orientation to a newcomer so that new contributors don’t get turned off by feeling nitpicked.

Have you heard of anyone who has combined GitHub with a different UI “top layer” to simplify the UI?

O’Reilly has done this with their Atlas platform. For reviews, the Gerrit UI has been extremely useful to a large collection of projects like OpenStack. There’s Penflip, which is a better frontend for writers than GitHub. The background story is great in that it offers anecdotes about GitHub being super successful for collaborative writing projects.

I think that GitHub itself is fine if your docs are treated like code. I think GitHub is great for technical writing, API documentation, and the like. Academic writers haven’t found GitHub that much of a match for their collaborative writing, see “The Limitations of GitHub for Writers” for example. It’s the actual terms that have to be adapted and adopted for GitHub to be a match for writers. For example, do you track doc bugs (issues) and write collaboratively with added content treated like software features? I say, yes!

If you just want simple markup like markdown for collaborative writing, check out Beegit. With git in the name I have to wonder if it’s git-backed, but couldn’t figure it out from a few minutes on their site. Looks promising but again, for treating docs like code, living and working with developers.


Male allies for women in tech: What’s needed?

I realized the other day that I have given my “Women in Tech: Be That Light” presentation a half a dozen times in the last year. One question that I still want a great answer for is when a man in the audience asks, “What can I do to make it better? How can I be that light?” I have ideas from my own experiences, and also point to the training courses and Ally Skills workshops offered by the Ada Initiative. Updated to add: Register now for the Monday 5/18 workshop at the OpenStack Summit in Vancouver!


On a personal level, here’s my short list based on my own experiences. My experiences are colored by my own privileges being white, straight, married with an amazing partner, a parent, living in a great country in a safe neighborhood, working in a secure job. So realize that even while I write my own experiences at a specific place in my career, all those stations in life color my own views, and may not directly help people with backgrounds dissimilar to mine.

What do women in tech need? How can I help?

  • Be that friendly colleague at meetups, especially to the few women in the room, while balancing the fact that she probably doesn’t want to be called out as uniquely female or an object to be admired. If you already know her, try to introduce her to someone else with common interests and make connections. If you don’t already know her, find someone you think she would feel comfortable speaking with to say hello. It’s interesting, sometimes I’m completely uncertain about approaching a woman who’s the only “other” woman at a meetup. So, women should also try to find a commonality — maybe one of her coworkers could introduce you to her. For women, it’s important make these connections in friendly and not competing ways, because oddly enough, when I’m the second woman in the room I don’t want to make the other woman feel uncomfortable either!
  • Realize that small annoyances over years add up to real frustration. I don’t point this out to say “don’t be annoying” but rather, be a great listener and be extremely respectful. Micro annoyances over time add up to women departing technical communities in droves. See what you can do in small ways, not just large, to keep women in your current tech communities.
  • For recruiting, when new women show up online on mailing lists or IRC or Github, please do answer questions with a “there are no questions too small or too large” attitude. I never would have survived my first 90 days working on OpenStack if it weren’t for Jay Pipes and Chuck Thier. Jay patiently helped me set up a real development environment by walking me through his setup on IRC. And since he was used to Github and going to Launchpad/Bazaar himself, he didn’t make me feel dumb for asking. Chuck didn’t laugh too hard when I tried to spell check the HTTP header “referer” to “referrer.” I felt like any other newbie, not a “new girl” with these two. (Woops, and I should never use the term “girl” for anyone over the age of 18.)
  • Recognize individuality when talking to team members, regardless of visible differences like gender or ethnicity. I struggle with this myself, having to pause before talking about my kids or my remodeling projects, since not everyone is interested! I struggle with assumptions about people all the time, and have to actively fight them myself. For men, you don’t want to assume an interest in cars or sports, so really this applies regardless of gender. All humans struggle with finding common interests without making assumptions.
  • See if you can do small, non-attention-drawing actions that ensure the safety of women in your communities. With the OpenStack Summit being held in different cities twice a year, I’ve been concerned for my personal safety as a woman traveling alone. Admitting that fear means I try to be more savvy about travel, but I still make mistakes like letting my phone battery die after calling a cab in another city after 11 at night. If you see a woman at a party alone, see if you can first make her feel welcome, but then also ensure there are safety measures for her traveling after the event.
  • If you see something, say something, and report correctly and safely for both the bad actor and target. This is really hard to do in the moment, believe me, I’ve been there. For me, being prepared is best, and knowing the scenarios and reporting methods ahead of time gives me the slightly better confidence I can do the right thing in the moment even if I’m shocked or scared. Find the “good and bad” ways to deal with incidents through this excellent Allies_training page.

If you’ve read this far, you really do want to make life better as a male ally. Realize that it’s okay to make mistakes — I’ve made them and learned from them over the years. This inclusion work by allies is not the easiest work to do, nor is it rewarding really. It’s the work of being a good human, and we’re all going to screw up. If someone points out a foible to you, such as saying “girls” instead of “women,” say “thank you” and move on, promising to do better next time.

If you think you already do all these things, make sure you look for ways to expand your reach to other minority groups and less privileged participants. I’m trying to do better with the physically different people I encounter at work. I would like to find ways to work well with people suffering from depression. I’ve got a son with Type I diabetes, what sort of advocacy can I do for people with unique medical needs? I’m asking myself how to make a difference. How about you? How can you do your part to equalize the tech industry?

work writing

Be sure to read about my Stacker journey

The editors at The New Stack do great things with their articles, and mine is no exception! Be sure to read Anne Gentle: One Stacker’s Journey.

Even though I’ve lived in Austin, Texas, for over 14 years now, I tend to say I’m a midwesterner when asked. There are traits associated with the spirit of the midwest that I’ll always identify in myself: hard work, resource creativity and conservation, humility, and a sense of wonder at trends being set somewhere in the world. Read more…


State of the Migration to Sphinx/RST

I wanted to document the migration journey while we are in the middle of it. Last week the OpenStack Super User site did a great article about the migration, How you can help with the documentation site refresh. We talked about the reasons for it: enable more contributors, offer simpler markup, be more Pythonic.

And more Pythonic we are. Let’s dig into what’s going on with the migration, what we’ve learned, and what we still have to learn.

Migration process

We’re nearly done with patches to review converted End User Guide files, but just a few Admin User Guide files are complete. Sign up on the OpenStack wiki at Documentation/Migrate. I’ve figured out how to include certain files in a build conditionally with an extension we’ll call “scope” for now. Using (and abusing) the meta information by putting a special directive in a file meant for admin-only lets us “tag” certain files for inclusion and build output with those files included.

New docs.openstack.org content page design
New docs.openstack.org content page design

How to build locally

We have always had tox jobs for building and testing the docs. The newest one runs the sphinx-build command for the end user guide.

If you don’t want to use tox, install these prereqs locally to test only the build:

pip install sphinx; pip install openstackdocstheme

Next, switch to the directory containing a conf.py and run:

sphinx-build /path/to/source/ path/to/build/

This command builds html output by default.

In troubleshooting some markup I found that the sphinx-build command does not give as much information about the markup as python setup.py build_sphinx does. So I will test a switch with a setup.py file as well as a conf.py file for each guide in the openstack-manuals repo.

To build locally with tox, follow the instructions on the wiki page. Building with tox is preferred as that matches our gate tests for patches. Feel free to ask for help in #openstack-doc on freenode IRC if you run into errors. We have tested the instructions on Linux, Mac, and Windows.

Conventions and editing RST markup

Docs tools guru Andreas Jaeger already had a head start in adding RST markup conventions to our Documentation/Markup_conventions wiki page on the OpenStack wiki. I’m finding that there are some types of content, such as extra information embedded in a list item like a table, that just can’t come over in its current state. I’m still working through these questions and it seems as though numbered lists can’t have much more than single list items. Anyone with info, please let us know if these are possible:

  • How to get numbered list continuation to work when you have a table after a #. list item?
  • How to get numbered list continuation to work when you have a bulleted list between #. list items?
  • How to get get embedded .. note: directives to work between numbered list items?

Matt Kassawara asked if there is a side-by-side editor for RST like there is for Markdown, and so far there is not, but the Sphinx development mailing list has a thread about what authors currently do as well as what they’d like to build.


We still need output bugs fixed. To me, the top priorities are:

  1. Sphinx template needs precise “Log a doc bug” link created on-demand similar to current functionality
  2. Sphinx openstackdocstheme needs to be tested for the translation toolchain
  3. Sphinx openstackdocstheme doesn’t style admonitions (note, warning, important) correctly
  4. Plus sign appearing when numbered list followed by bulleted list

What I need to understand is what would compel us to update Sphinx itself, considering we don’t know when their next release is. We already pin to a beta version (1.3b) so perhaps  we can patch as needed and pin our version.


Generally, make sure your Python environment is installed and ready to go, and then use a virtualenv to be sure you have “corded off” the environment and know exactly what’s installed.

Use “pip freeze” to get a list of what is installed. If a package is missing, make sure you have access to pypi by running the pip install command with -vvv. Also if you’re not working in a virtualenv, ensure you run the install command with sudo on Mac or Linux.

If you’re working within a virtual machine like VirtualBox, you may find that networking settings change even if you go from wired to wireless or from one wireless network to another.

If the output looks strange to you, delete the /build/ directory then re-build. I suspect that CSS and JS files remain outdated or are not copied over every time.

Please log bugs in openstack-manuals with the tag “openstackdocstheme” if you see bugs in the output.

What this means for new guides in progress

The only new guide in progress is the Networking Guide and some of it’s in markdown, some of it’s in DocBook, and all of it can go to RST. We must get the translation toolchain working prior to publishing, and I’d prefer to get more output bugs fixed prior to switching any more guides.


community techpubs tools

Tearing down obstacles to OpenStack documentation contributions

Rip. Shred. Tear. Let’s gather up the obstacles to documentation contribution and tear them down one by one. I’ve designed a survey with the help of the OpenStack docs team to determine blockers for docs contributions. If you’ve contributed to OpenStack, please fill it out here:


I want to use this survey to avoid shouting opinions and instead make sure we gather data first. This survey helps us find the biggest barriers so that we can build the best collaboration systems for documentation on OpenStack. Here are the obstacles culled from discussions in the community:

  • The git/gerrit workflow isn’t in my normal work environment
  • The DocBook and WADL (XML source) tools are not in my normal work environment
  • My team or manager doesn’t value documentation so we don’t make time for it
  • Every time I want to contribute to docs, I can’t figure out where to put the information I know
  • When I’ve tried to patch documentation, the review process was difficult or took too long
  • When I’ve contributed to docs, developers changed things without concern for docs, so my efforts were wasted
  • Testing doc patches requires an OpenStack environment I don’t have set up or access to in a lab
  • I think someone else should write the documentation, not me
  • I would only contribute documentation if I were paid to do so

Based on the input from the survey, I want to gather requirements for doc collaboration.

We have different docs for different audiences:

  • cross-project docs for deploy/install/config: openstack-manuals
  • API docs references, standards: api-site and others

These are written with the git/gerrit method. I want to talk about standing up a new docs site that serves our requirements:

Solution must be completely open source
Content must be available online
Content must be indexable by search engines
Content must be searchable
Content should be easily cross-linked by topic and type (priority:low)
Enable comments, ratings, and analytics (or ask.openstack.org integration) (priority:low)

Readers must get versions of technical content specific to version of product
Modular authoring of content
Graphic and text content should be stored as files, not in a database
Consumers must get technical content in PDF, html, video, audio
Workflow for review and approval prior to publishing content

Content must be re-usable across authors and personas (Single source)
Must support many content authors with multiple authoring tools
Existing content must migrate smoothly
All content versions need to be comparable (diff) across versions
Content must be organizationally segregated based on user personas
Draft content must be reviewable in HTML
Link maintenance – Links must update with little manual maintenance to avoid broken links and link validation

Please take the survey and make your voice heard! Also please join us at a cross-project session at the OpenStack Summit to discuss doc contributions. We’ll go over the results there. The survey is open until the first week of May.

community work writing

How to Build OpenStack Docs and Contributors through Community

I’m well past the three year mark, working on a new open source project that grows and grows every six months. I’ve been working closely with Diane Fleming at Rackspace to focus completely on upstream OpenStack. Upstream means that all of our documentation work goes to the open source project itself. So while Rackspace runs OpenStack in production and for our customers private clouds, Diane and I focus on documentation that helps any organization run and use OpenStack. We have put together an outline of what we do to make upstream OpenStack documentation better all the time.

Growth, scaling, and related challenges

When I started, there were just two projects with two APIs. Now we have 130 git repositories fostered by over twenty related programs. As you can imagine this scenario causes scaling difficulties but we are bravely making our way. Here are some of the challenges we have faced and what we’ve done to lessen the pain of coordinated, collaborative technical documentation in an open source community.


In the face of language and technical barriers, the OpenStack docs team used a combination of IRC meetings, documentation boot camp, Google hang-outs, a busy docs-team mailing list, and other methods to create a flourishing, global team of writers and technical contributors who have immensely improved the OpenStack docs in the last couple of years. The release that went out in Spring of 2013, three people wrote half of the docs. For the release that went out in Fall of 2013, seven people wrote half the docs. I can’t wait to see what our numbers are for the release going out next, on April 17th.

Team-building tools – the good, the bad, and the ugly

Here are some benefits and pitfalls of these tools:

  • IRC: Pros – clear agenda, follow-through week-to-week, global participation now that we have APAC and North American meetings. IRC meeting bogs enable an automated log of minutes. Cons: difficult to find agreeable time, no face-to-face, hard to introduce new topics.
  • Office hours: Seemed like a good idea but fell by the wayside, we did not have much attendance. As our team grows, people can stop by the IRC channel at any time to get one-on-one help.
  • Google Hangouts: With the video and voice enabled, it is nice to see each other’s faces without having to travel. Hard to find an agreeable time with the round-the-world team.
  • Boot camp: Extremely positive experience – spawned new ideas and new connections. Downside is the cost/time factor. We had great survey responses but decided we didn’t need one every six months.
  • Mailing list: Good way to resolve immediate issues and gather consensus as well as multiple view points.
  • Book sprints: Good way to get a needed book written and distributed. Not a good way to build ongoing community for maintenance, and in some ways you have to be careful not to build a book that no one else thinks they should contribute to. But community is just one part of good docs – this is a good complement to other efforts.

OpenStack docs – before and after

How have the docs changed due to team building?

  • Cleaner, more compact library. We did a huge refactor prior to the Boot Camp, which has made it easier to specify what types of content goes where.
  • Better writing. Professional technical writers have done an amazing job avoiding “frankendoc” — by editing, reviewing, and polishing with an agreed-upon style guide, we improve the actual writing to better serve readers and users.
  • Better technical content. In OpenStack, teams have core reviewers and most teams require two core reviewers must approve a change before it gets built to the published site. As we expand our reviewers (not just core but many reviewers) our docs have improved technically.
  • Better automation. By writing tools that scrape the code for docstrings we are able to keep up with fast-moving projects that release every six months.
  • Timing with releases. We carefully scope what documents are considered tied to a release. The Install Guides and Configuration Reference are the only two books built from a set release. All other documents are continuously published.

OpenStack contributors – before and after

How have the relationships among contributors and contributors’ roles changed due to team building?

  • Much greater communication among contributors – now we know each other on a more personal level, and feel more comfortable working together
  • Contributors have found where their strengths lie in the community. Some people are more tools and gear heads and build gates and tests and build tools. Some people are natural editors and review heavily with suggested edits. Some people are blue-sky visionaries. Some people are heads-down system administrators and architects. There’s a place for everyone, not just writers.

What’s to come?

We want to discuss revisions to our original vision openly. This blog post is a starting point, but we are listening on all available channels. At the OpenStack Summit in Atlanta in May, I want to collaborate on a request for proposals for a new front-end design for our documentation that can help us make changes to how docs are authored. I’d like to find out more about ways to enable non-CLA contributors to the docs. I have lots of ideas and look forward to working with this amazing group to improve our processes and results.


community work

Finding an OpenStack Mentor

Last week I ran an internal “So You Want to be an OpenStack Contributor?” workshop showing the different ways to work on OpenStack. Here’s the slide show so you can see the way I approached it. As the Documentation Program Technical Lead you’d think I’d steer people straight to the documentation bug backlog, but I try to find out where interests lie before going straight to doc fixes. Definitely people should read the docs as a great start.

You can work on OpenStack in non-code ways, such as bug triaging. Also the OpenStack Foundation does community marketing and staffs booths at events from the community. But a great way to understand the ins and outs of OpenStack-landia is to commit a patch.

I have to admit, I didn’t know much when I first started working on OpenStack at Rackspace. The Swift team was the group I had immediate access to in person. Wow were they patient with me while I made hilarious-in-hindsite errors. I had a patch where I changed “referer” one r to “referrer” two rs, because duh that’s how referrer is spelled. Well as it turns out that’s not the way the WC3 HTTP Protocol specifies request headers since 1992 or so, woops! Then I also managed to change the RST backticks (`) to single quotes (‘) which is absolutely not going to render correctly with Sphinx. Chuck Thier patiently explained the errors I had made and how to correct them. So do not be discouraged if it’s difficult to get the hang of your first patch or two or ten. Code reviewers are happy to help you iterate and revise. I’ve heard of good and bad patch reviewing going on in the community so I encourage you to find a real person who can help you get helpful reviews.

We also have organized OpenStack mentor programs now. We’ve been participating in the GNOME Outreach Program for Women for three rounds, and we’re a participating organization with the Google Summer of Code program for 2014. There are ideas for projects on the OpenStack wiki:

We have dedicated IRC channels for new contributors – #openstack-101 and #openstack-opw on freenode. Our OPW interns have written great blog entries about getting started with OpenStack (In a nutshell:how OpenStack works) and DevStack (Installing DevStack with Vagrant). Their fresh eyes make for great starting points. I encourage us all make this work both ways – people of OpenStack, be mentors, and newcomers, seek out the people in OpenStack who want to help you get started. Updated to add: be sure to check out opensource.com for “How to Contribute to OpenStack.”

community techpubs work writing

OpenStack Operations Guide Mini Sprint


We held a two-day mini-sprint in Boston at the end of January to update the OpenStack Operations Guide. You may remember the first five-day sprint was in Austin in February 2013. This time, the sprint was shorter with fewer people in Boston and a few remote, but we had quite specific goals:

  • Update from Folsom to Havana (about a year’s worth of OpenStack features)
  • Roadmap discussion about nova-network and neutron, the two software-defined networking solutions implemented for OpenStack
  • Add upgrade instructions from grizzly to havana
  • Implement and test the use of parts to encapsulate chapters
  • Address editor comments from our developmental editor at O’Reilly
  • Add a reference architecture using RedHat Enterprise Linux and neutron for networking

Some quick wins for adding content were:

We added and updated content like mad during the two days:

The two toughest updates are still in progress, and our deadline for handover to O’Reilly is this Wednesday. The first tough nut to crack was getting agreement on adding an example architecture for Red Hat Enterprise Linux. We are nearly there, just a few more fixes to go, at https://review.openstack.org/#/c/69816/. The second is testing the upgrade process from grizzly to havana on both Ubuntu and RedHat Enterprise Linux. That’s still in progress at https://review.openstack.org/#/c/68936/.

The next steps for the O’Reilly edition are proofreading, copyediting, and indexing over the next six weeks or so. I’ll be keeping the O’Reilly edition in synch with our community-edited guide. As always, anyone in the OpenStack community can contribute to the Operations Guide using the steps on our wiki page. This guide follows the O’Reilly style guide rather than our established OpenStack documentation conventions. I’m looking forward to a great future for this guide and we’re all pretty happy with the results of the second mini-sprint.

Thanks to everyone making this a priority! Our host at MIT was Jon Proulx joined by Everett Toews who braved airport layovers and snow, and Tom Fifield who wrote the most patches despite a complete lack of sleep. Joe Topjian worked on edits for months leading up and has been tireless in making sure our integrity and truth lives on through this guide. Thanks too to the the hard working developmental editor at O’Reilly who offered lunch in Boston, Brian Anderson, joined by Andy Oram. David Cramer got DocBook parts working for us in time for the sprint. Summer Long worked long and hard on the example architecture for RedHat. Our remote reviewers Matt Kassawara, Andreas Jaeger, and Steve Gordon were so valuable during the process and ongoing. Shilla Saebi gave some nice copyediting this past week. What an effort!