19:00:03 <felixfontein> #startmeeting Ansible Community Meeting
19:00:03 <zodbot> Meeting started Wed Mar 15 19:00:03 2023 UTC.
19:00:03 <zodbot> This meeting is logged and archived in a public location.
19:00:03 <zodbot> The chair is felixfontein. Information about MeetBot at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Zodbot#Meeting_Functions.
19:00:04 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
19:00:04 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'ansible_community_meeting'
19:00:04 <felixfontein> #topic Agenda https://github.com/ansible/community/issues/679
19:00:06 <felixfontein> acozine, andersson007_, anwesha, ascherbaum, baptistemm, bcoca, briantist, cidrblock, cyberpear, cybette, dericcrago, dmsimard, felixfontein, geerlingguy, gotmax, gundalow, gwmngilfen, ikhan_, jillr, jtanner, lmodemal, mariolenz[m], markuman, maxamillion, misc, nitzmahone, oranod, resmo, russoz, samccann, thaumos, wbentley15[m], zbr: The Ansible community meeting is starting now!
19:00:12 <felixfontein> The ping list is stored at https://kutt.it/meeting-people. Feel free to add or remove yourself.
19:00:15 <felixfontein> #info Agenda: https://github.com/ansible/community/issues/679 / Topics: https://github.com/ansible-community/community-topics
19:00:18 <felixfontein> #topic Updates
19:00:27 <cybette_> o/
19:00:31 <felixfontein> #chair cybette_
19:00:31 <zodbot> Current chairs: cybette_ felixfontein
19:00:46 <cybette_> #info Please vote on "Adopt a new upstream community website", voting ends 2023-03-21 https://github.com/ansible-community/community-topics/discussions/208
19:00:57 <cybette_> #info Please vote on "Use a forum to build project-wide participation & discussion", voting ends 2023-03-27 https://github.com/ansible-community/community-topics/discussions/211
19:01:23 <felixfontein> The community voted to try to include semantic markup into ansible-core 2.15 / Ansible 8 (https://github.com/ansible-community/community-topics/issues/53#issuecomment-1462559857)
19:01:27 <samccann> o/
19:01:27 <felixfontein> #info The community voted to try to include semantic markup into ansible-core 2.15 / Ansible 8 (https://github.com/ansible-community/community-topics/issues/53#issuecomment-1462559857)
19:01:32 <felixfontein> oops
19:01:34 <felixfontein> #chair samccann
19:01:34 <zodbot> Current chairs: cybette_ felixfontein samccann
19:01:52 <Leo[m]1> hi all!
19:02:12 <felixfontein> #chair Leo[m]1
19:02:12 <zodbot> Current chairs: Leo[m]1 cybette_ felixfontein samccann
19:02:38 <felixfontein> #info It's two weeks until the ansible-core 2.15 feature freeze: https://github.com/ansible/ansible/blob/devel/docs/docsite/rst/roadmap/ROADMAP_2_15.rst#release-phase
19:03:30 <anwesha[m]> Hello everyone
19:03:33 <felixfontein> #chair anwesha[m]
19:03:33 <zodbot> Current chairs: Leo[m]1 anwesha[m] cybette_ felixfontein samccann
19:04:09 <gotmax23> .hi
19:04:10 <zodbot> gotmax23: gotmax23 'Maxwell G' <maxwell@gtmx.me>
19:04:21 * gotmax23 is busy today but I'm somewhat present
19:04:31 <felixfontein> #chair gotmax23
19:04:31 <zodbot> Current chairs: Leo[m]1 anwesha[m] cybette_ felixfontein gotmax23 samccann
19:05:56 <felixfontein> is there a specific topic you want to talk about?
19:07:32 <felixfontein> I'd like to talk about nitz's idea in https://github.com/ansible-community/community-topics/issues/154#issuecomment-1464590465, but I'm not sure whether this is something that interests you all :)
19:07:51 <mariolenz[m]> o/
19:07:59 <felixfontein> #chair mariolenz[m]
19:07:59 <zodbot> Current chairs: Leo[m]1 anwesha[m] cybette_ felixfontein gotmax23 mariolenz[m] samccann
19:08:16 <samccann> I'd like to understand the status of semantic markup but we can cover that later if you want
19:08:24 <felixfontein> that might be better suited for an async discussion, though right now there isn't much discussion happening in #154...
19:08:50 <felixfontein> samccann: let's talk about that first (if nobody has something more urgent)
19:08:57 <Leo[m]1> The community site discussion and vote are quite active
19:09:43 <Leo[m]1> but I don't know if that's a topic for a meeting while it's being handled there? (sorry)
19:10:00 <samccann> so on semantic markup - the antsibull-docs PR is ready to merge if Matt agrees but there's no 'content' to prove it works afaik, right? Chicken/egg problem?
19:10:32 <felixfontein> Leo[m]1: we can also talk about that, but let's quickly cover semantic markup first :)
19:10:38 <felixfontein> #topic Semantic markup
19:11:19 <felixfontein> samccann: well, for the non-semantic markup changes there are examples, but yes, for semantic markup there cannot be examples yet since collections included in Ansible should not yet use it
19:11:29 <cybette_> Leo: we brought up the community site/forum topic during last 2 meetings, but those present preferred to put the long form discussions (which takes a while to formulate and write out) in the github issues
19:11:48 <cybette_> but we can discuss if there's time (and interest)
19:12:38 <felixfontein> so basically right now there are two open PRs for ansible-core: a) allowing semantic markup in the docsite (https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/80201), and b) allowing semantic markup in ansible-doc and add semantic markup validation to the validate-modules sanity test
19:12:48 <samccann> felixfontein: okay cool. So there is the PR for ansible-doc changes... and a need for docs to explain the new markup?
19:13:07 <samccann> heh you typed faster
19:13:17 <samccann> but yeah, also docs to go with it to describe how to use
19:13:18 <acozine> o/
19:13:46 <felixfontein> I didn't manage to work on the docs PR yet; I'm wondering whether it is a good idea to put that into the Ansible docs for ansible-core 2.15 when not all tooling (like Automation Hub / galaxy_ng and ansible-language-server etc.) supports semantic markup yet
19:13:50 <felixfontein> #chair acozine
19:13:50 <zodbot> Current chairs: Leo[m]1 acozine anwesha[m] cybette_ felixfontein gotmax23 mariolenz[m] samccann
19:14:47 <samccann> hmm. interesting thought
19:15:00 <remindbot[m]> @cybette:ansible.im cyb-clock chimes every 15 minutes during the community meeting
19:15:01 <felixfontein> but it should definitely go into devel not long after the feature freeze (so it shows up in the devel docs), or even before (depending what folks think about delaying the docs)
19:15:43 <samccann> do you plan on using it in your collections soon?
19:15:58 <felixfontein> samccann: do you have any idea whether the ansible-doc/validate_modules PR has a chance to make it in to ansible-core 2.15?
19:16:20 <felixfontein> I'll probably only start using it once the last Ansible 7.x.0 release is out, otherwise the docsite for that collection in Ansible 7 will look broken
19:16:34 <samccann> no I don't but happy to ping the pr and see what shakes loose
19:16:35 <felixfontein> so only some weeks *after* ansible-core 2.15.0 is released
19:17:33 <samccann> so https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/74937 is the validate pr you are talking about?
19:17:37 <samccann> or something else?
19:17:58 <felixfontein> yes, that's the one
19:18:20 <samccann> ok cool
19:18:31 <felixfontein> it makes the ansible-doc text output recognize semantic markup so semantic markup looks nice when using the ansible-doc CLI tool, and it adds basic validation
19:19:10 <felixfontein> the tests show how the output looks like: https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/74937/files#diff-ffb7d7139b0bce523da8e29927b84ced4210df9a774b763ccfccb5c57ef0b932 shows the ansible-doc text output of https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/74937/files#diff-e3a1b4cbf242d58bc22d74d1be74c5acfd19e5b5e2f9e52d1c7409cb86dab93b
19:19:14 <samccann> ok I pinged folks in that issue.
19:19:26 <felixfontein> and https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/74937/files#diff-5d587800b7a45ed191c51b23475d49c9ec4812e44b49b86a9c59a89f45c5860d shows some error messages in wrong markup spit out by validate-modules
19:20:31 <samccann> ok cool. so the antsibull-docs and that validate PR need to merge before 2.15 branch pull and we're good to go
19:20:39 <samccann> we can decide to document (or not) later
19:21:11 <felixfontein> from my POV the docsite PR is the most important one, since not so nice text output is less bad (IMO) than wrong docsite output
19:21:49 <felixfontein> and validate-modules is least important - it would be very annoying to have to disable validation for modules/plugins using semantic markup, but at least the documentation would look good if the other two are merged
19:22:44 <felixfontein> my hope is that everything is merged and included in ansible-core 2.15.0 though :)
19:23:10 <mariolenz[m]> Sorry, I don't understand. Will semantic markup be supported only with the next ansible-core release, or is there a chance to get it backported?
19:23:24 <felixfontein> mariolenz[m]: there is zero chance to get this backported :(
19:23:55 <felixfontein> mariolenz[m]: and if it doens't make the 2.15.0 release it has to wait for at least 2.16.0, again without chance for backports
19:23:57 <samccann> yeah its a feature for 2.15 for sure
19:24:11 <samccann> yeah what felixfontein said
19:24:18 <felixfontein> which is why I really want to get it into 2.15.0, so we don't have to wait another 6 months :)
19:24:41 <felixfontein> we already waited over two years...
19:24:46 <mariolenz[m]> OK. That means collections shouldn't use it until they drop support < 2.15.0, right?
19:25:23 <samccann> So for Ansible 8 - they will display correctly on the docsite. They 'may' display correctly on ansible-doc if you have 2.15
19:25:24 <felixfontein> mariolenz[m]: that's debatable... the collections will work fine with < 2.15.0, except that ansible-doc text output looks not so nice... you see O(foo) instead of `foo', and things like that
19:25:55 <felixfontein> I'll definitely start using it for some smaller collections once 2.15.0 is out, even though they still support several older ansible-core versions
19:26:03 <felixfontein> I don't want to wait several more years ;)
19:26:59 <mariolenz[m]> So it's completely downwards compatible, ansible-test wouldn't complain?
19:27:44 <felixfontein> well, older ansible-test versions will complain about some things (like giving a syntax error when using plugins in `seealso:`; this might be the only one though)
19:27:59 <felixfontein> but these can be ignored, assuming that at least the latest ansible-test validate-module handles them correctly
19:29:23 <felixfontein> ok, any more questions on semantic markup? otherwise let's switch to the community site
19:30:00 <remindbot[m]> @cybette:ansible.im cyb-clock chimes every 15 minutes during the community meeting
19:30:37 <felixfontein> #topic Community site
19:30:54 <felixfontein> #info Discussions: https://github.com/ansible-community/community-topics/issues/201 and https://github.com/ansible-community/community-topics/issues/202
19:31:00 <mariolenz[m]> Lots of question, but no ones we have to discuss here. I still need to understand more, and I can only do this by playing around with it.
19:31:28 <felixfontein> mariolenz[m]: feel free to ping me directly, or ask in the discussion issue or somewhere else :)
19:32:55 <felixfontein> Leo[m]1: is there something specific you want to talk about?
19:33:41 <felixfontein> and a question from me: so docs.ansible.com should also move to the new domain? (or in other words: are there any non-community docs (left) on docs.ansible.com?)
19:34:27 <samccann> acozine: asked a similar question on the community website topic
19:35:00 <samccann> I would think, yes, docs would become something like docs.ansible.community (if that's the proposed DNS) but she has valid point about ensuring we keep our search reputation
19:35:07 <Leo[m]1> I was thinking on the redirects for the new site, mentioned by samccann as well. Thinking a 302 would probably be best if we were to do those kind of things, until at least the ansible.com domain issue is resolved.
19:35:15 <felixfontein> yes, that's somewhat why I ask. so far I didn't think of docs.ansible.com when thinking about the new community domains
19:35:29 <samccann> as for non-community - there are tower/controller docs that are really product, not community.
19:35:49 <felixfontein> Leo[m]1: why 302 and not 301?
19:35:50 <mariolenz[m]> You should know [my opinion on this](https://github.com/ansible-community/community-topics/issues/201#issuecomment-1448152369) already: I think it's a good idea. At least, when it comes to having a DNS domain `ansible.community`. I don't know enough about Discourse to voice a an opinion on using it.
19:35:56 <samccann> I don't know what happens to those as yet.
19:36:02 <felixfontein> I'm not sure whether 302 will update search engine indexes
19:36:33 <Leo[m]1> felixfontein: thinking long term, wouldn't 301 hurt us if we move back to ansible.com, with yet another 301 from ansible.community??
19:37:06 <Leo[m]1> also, doing a 301 before the dust is settled, might not be a good idea
19:37:18 <felixfontein> Leo[m]1: I'm not SEO expert, but yeah, moving back could hurt since browsers tend to cache 301's... but I don't think we should do that :)
19:37:53 <cybette_> This is something we'll still need to discuss (and feedback definitely welcomed), my thinking is that docs.ansible.com remains for now, the new website will link to it but not move it yet
19:38:10 <mariolenz[m]> But this is about how to do the transition to ansible.community, not if... or am I wrong?
19:38:18 <acozine> If we are essentially getting rid of ansible.com, and there will no longer be any content at docs.ansible.com (community docs would move to docs.ansible.community and product docs to redhat.com/RHAAP or something similar), then I'm a bit more comfortable
19:39:21 <samccann> cybette: my nickel - if we can find the right type of redirects,  docs should move to the new site once it's 'comfortably' ready so to speak.
19:39:23 <felixfontein> according to https://stackoverflow.com/questions/9130422/how-long-do-browsers-cache-http-301s redirecting back *should* work fine nowadays
19:40:07 <samccann> but yeah, the fact we have product docs on docs.ansible.com may delay that move (for a long time)
19:40:26 <felixfontein> hmm, if RH doesn't want to use ansible.com anymore for the product, why not use it for community (instead of moving to ansible.community)? :)
19:40:32 <samccann> but if we have them separate, we will struggle to have a common ux/look-feel
19:40:42 <acozine> felixfontein: that's my question exactly
19:41:07 <felixfontein> acozine: I guess the question is that the move of the product stuff from ansible.com will take a loooooooooooong time
19:41:08 <samccann> I don't know the future of any changes to Ansible.com but it is already 'branded' for Red Hat
19:41:25 <samccann> and not under community control. My nickel - whether it stays or not, we need a community home
19:42:20 <cybette_> felixfontein, acozine: it's probably more about timing, and no decisions have been made yet. We can't wait on a "possibly might happen" scenario
19:43:14 <felixfontein> I agree, I think we should only wait if we know it will be at most X months (with X small); but it seems that X is a large number (and might not even be finite)
19:43:27 <samccann> heh
19:43:48 <cybette_> lim x→∞
19:43:56 <felixfontein> :)
19:44:11 <felixfontein> corporate decisions spanning multiple teams tend to do that sometimes...
19:45:00 <remindbot[m]> @cybette:ansible.im cyb-clock chimes every 15 minutes during the community meeting
19:49:29 <samccann> So I'll investigate further about the impact of someday changing docs.ansible.com to docs.ansible.community or something like that...to be sure when we make a move like that we don't leave our SEO in the dust
19:50:16 <Leo[m]1> as long as you keep the /x/t/z structure or do proper redirects (301 or 302), it shouldn't
19:50:35 <felixfontein> I think so too, though I guess 301 works better than 302
19:50:48 <felixfontein> (but I'm sure SEO folks can tell you which is better)
19:50:51 <Leo[m]1> you can mirror and redirect the whole subdomain or do it by rules
19:51:25 <Leo[m]1> I had bad experiences while doing some changes with 301, so if given the choice, I would rather do it in two moves, 302, 301 later
19:52:04 <felixfontein> Leo[m]1: bad experiences in the sense of you later found out that you didn't want the redirect?
19:52:36 <Leo[m]1> yes, or there was a mistake or a change request
19:55:18 <mariolenz[m]> Not to put too fine a point on this, but it looks like most reactions have been positive to create ansible.community. Really a lot of positive reactions. I think we should follow the community there.
19:56:51 <cybette_> right, we will still need to work out some details, but I think given the positive feedback and votes we should start moving in that direction sooner rather than later
19:57:21 <felixfontein> good :)
19:57:24 <felixfontein> #topic open floor
19:57:29 <felixfontein> if there are any quick other topics...
19:59:07 <mariolenz[m]> I think we will have to work a lot of details. But it all starts with the commitement to have ansible.community (or similar) as the main domain for the ansible project ;-)
19:59:46 <felixfontein> :+1:
20:00:44 <cybette_> gotta drop for another meeting. thanks everyone!
20:00:50 <felixfontein> thanks everyone!
20:00:51 <felixfontein> #endmeeting