<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:01:37
!startmeeting Fedora Docs Team Meeting - 2026-05-05
<@meetbot:fedora.im>
13:01:38
Meeting started at 2026-05-05 13:01:37 UTC
<@meetbot:fedora.im>
13:01:38
The Meeting name is 'Fedora Docs Team Meeting - 2026-05-05'
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:01:40
!meetingname docs
<@meetbot:fedora.im>
13:01:40
The Meeting Name is now docs
<@cstrauf:fedora.im>
13:02:04
I'll be right there. 5min.
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:02:19
!topic Intros, welcomes, hellos
<@pbokoc:fedora.im>
13:02:31
!hi
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:02:34
!info Welcome to another Fedora Docs Team meeting! If you are present and intend to follow along with today's meeting, please identify yourself by typing `!hi` in the chat.
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:02:37
!hi
<@hricky:fedora.im>
13:02:40
!hi
<@pboy:fedora.im>
13:02:42
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
13:02:46
Petr Bokoc: Petr Bokoฤ (pbokoc)
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:02:46
Petr Bokoc: I got Meet Bot warmed up for you ๐
<@egret:fedora.im>
13:02:49
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
13:02:50
Justin Wheeler: Justin Wheeler (jflory7) - he / him / his
<@nielsenb:fedora.im>
13:03:02
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
13:03:03
Brandon Nielsen: Brandon Nielsen (nielsenb)
<@pbokoc:fedora.im>
13:03:18
Oh, I thought you were going to run the meeting! :)
<@a-moor:fedora.im>
13:03:21
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
13:03:22
Andreas Moor: Andreas Moor (a-moor)
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:03:57
Oh, I can ๐
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:04:06
I can emcee and hand over to topic owners for the topics.
<@theprogram:fedora.im>
13:04:07
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
13:04:11
MatH: Mat H (theprogram)
<@egret:fedora.im>
13:04:21
! hi
<@egret:fedora.im>
13:04:35
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
13:04:36
Eli Ridge: Eli Ridge (egret)
<@cstrauf:fedora.im>
13:05:03
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
13:05:04
Christian Strauf: Christian Strauf (cstrauf)
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:05:20
Alrighty then! We are five minutes past and have a good quorum.
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:05:23
Let's get the show on the road.
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:05:27
!info Present: @jflory7, @pbokoc, @pboy, @nielsenb, @a-moor, @theprogram, @egret, @cstrauf
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:06:24
!topic Announcements & news
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:07:14
!info Fedora Linux 44 released last Tuesday. The F43 release cycle is now concluding, and we are shifting to the F44 release cycle. This means time to focus on the next release and also participate in the next round of community elections.
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:08:01
!info FYI: Nominations for Fedora Council, FESCo, Mindshare Committee, and EPEL Steering Committee all open this Wednesday, 7 May 2026. See the relevant wiki pages for opening nominations. (More to come on a Wednesday Community Blog article.)
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:08:23
!link https://fedoramagazine.org/announcing-fedora-linux-44/
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:08:39
!info An official welcome to Jocelyn Gould (UTC-4) as our newest Fedora Docs Team member! ๐
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:08:53
!link https://forge.fedoraproject.org/docs/tickets/issues/30
<@pbokoc:fedora.im>
13:10:07
Also btw, if someone sends an application and I set a deadline on the issue and then forget about it, don't hesitate to ping me about it if you notice. I should have added Jocelyn on Apr 29 or so
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:10:27
!info Meta: Sometime soon, the project board on the "Tickets" repo will be migrated to an organization-level project board in Forgejo. This means we can use the same project board across all of the Docs Team repos.
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:10:27
!link https://forge.fedoraproject.org/docs/tickets/issues/33
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:11:11
!info Going forward, the correct way to triage tickets for meeting discussion will be to add an issue to the column for meeting triage. Please take note if you want to bring a topic up in one of our team meetings going forward! All Docs Team members are expected to have write access to the Project board.
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:11:18
EOF
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:11:21
Anyone else have anything?
<@cstrauf:fedora.im>
13:13:18
Is this post-migration of the board to the org-level on Forgejo right now?
<@cstrauf:fedora.im>
13:13:25
Is this post-migration of the board to the org-level on Forgejo or right now?
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:13:49
I mean, anything in the Tickets repo can work now, but it will only appear on the org level once Petr Bokoc has a chance to migrate it.
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:14:04
Then, any repo can add issues to the project board
<@cstrauf:fedora.im>
13:14:13
OK. Understood.
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:14:15
Well, any repo under `docs/*`
<@cstrauf:fedora.im>
13:14:19
Thanks for the clarification.
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:14:25
No problem!
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:14:39
In lieu of any other announcements, let's keep plugging alongโฆ
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:14:54
Do think about the upcoming election nominations, though, whether for yourself or someone else you admire in the community ๐
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:15:00
!topic Ticket discussion
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:15:35
!link https://forge.fedoraproject.org/docs/tickets/issues?labels=3655
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:15:53
Hmmmโฆ that is way too many tickets to discuss in one meeting. However, me and Petr Bokoc had a chance to do a bit of pre-meeting prioritization.
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:16:31
!info Ticket #40: We need to put together a set of proper labels that would be applicable to every repo. What exactly do we want to track?
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:16:34
!link https://forge.fedoraproject.org/docs/tickets/issues/40
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:16:37
!info Ticket #19: Outdated docsbuilder scripts
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:16:40
!link https://forge.fedoraproject.org/docs/tickets/issues/19
<@hricky:fedora.im>
13:17:45
I'm mostly AFK for this week.
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:17:47
Anyone else want to throw a topic out there before we lock in?
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:17:53
ACK!
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:18:19
Topics locking in 3โฆ
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:18:34
2โฆ
<@egret:fedora.im>
13:18:38
Jocelyn Gould (UTC-4): and myself have almost finished #14 and could use review if possible
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:18:45
Eli Ridge: ACK!
<@egret:fedora.im>
13:19:10
Lets say we are ready for review now
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:19:23
!info Ticket #14: Local workflow authoring article. Ready for review/sign-off.
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:19:25
!link https://forge.fedoraproject.org/docs/tickets/issues/14
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:19:29
With that, I think we have an agenda!
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:19:33
Let's do this ๐
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:20:12
!topic Ticket #40: [Repo alignment] Fix labels
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:20:17
!link https://forge.fedoraproject.org/docs/tickets/issues/40
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:20:20
Petr Bokoc: This one is you ๐
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:20:44
I think it is a good discussion to have
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:20:57
We are taking about org-level labels, repo-specific labels, or both?
<@cstrauf:fedora.im>
13:21:05
Is there a doc describing current labels?
<@pbokoc:fedora.im>
13:21:28
Ideally I'd like to just have a single org-level set of those instead of keeping them per-repo
<@pbokoc:fedora.im>
13:21:46
So that people don't have to fish them out of a big list where they're in a different location every time
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:22:12
No. It is a mix of legacy, imported stuff and a mix of things I came up with independently based on other Fedora teams from over the years.
<@pboy:fedora.im>
13:22:17
I suppose, dependent on what the repo is about, you need different labels.
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:22:30
For some labels, this might make sense (e.g. `good first issue`) but for others, it might not
<@pbokoc:fedora.im>
13:22:31
Christian Strauf No, because it's a totally disorganized mess right now. There wasn't any thought given to it, it's just various remnants from pagure/gitlab, possibly also combined with the forgejo default set
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:22:42
!link https://forge.fedoraproject.org/org/docs/settings/labels
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:22:48
^^This is our current list of org-wide labels
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:23:00
I confess that I made all of these.
<@cstrauf:fedora.im>
13:23:05
This page is not accessible to me.
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:23:16
Folks can tell me if these make sense or not ๐
<@cstrauf:fedora.im>
13:23:16
Do you need special rights?
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:23:26
Hmmm. Maybe it requires admin rights? ๐ค
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:23:29
Hold on.
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:23:53
So, these are all of the labels. Every single repo in `docs/` will get this labels by default.
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:23:57
There is no way to opt out.
<@cstrauf:fedora.im>
13:24:01
How about this idea:
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:24:16
Oh, they are a mess of my own creation, I suppose ๐
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:24:43
Anyways, I am happy to be told what is sensible versus what is not. I have opinions of course, since I made the labels, but this is not the Justin Wheeler Show
<@a-moor:fedora.im>
13:24:53
404 for me too
<@cstrauf:fedora.im>
13:25:19
Petr Bokoc seems to have a good idea what labels make sense as a base set. How about he makes the start with adding all labels with explanation to the ticket that he deems necessary, we discuss if any lables are missing and in the end we have a collection of base labels?
<@pboy:fedora.im>
13:25:33
Is it possible to have a set of organization wide labels and an additional set of repo specific labels?
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:25:50
FWIW, it also makes it easier to have scripts that can check labels across repos. In the backend, the Forgejo API stores them all with the same UUID for the labels. It is a minor thing, but our friends in #data:fedoraproject.org might be happy about that later ๐
<@pbokoc:fedora.im>
13:26:11
One issue is that some of these labels should be automatically applied. For example, "needs triage" is only useful if it's automatically slapped on any new issue, a team member can then get rid of it. But unfortunately I don't think Forgejo supports that. (Maybe a runner could do it?)
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:26:32
Organization-wide labels are forced upon every repo in `docs/`. Not sure what Petr Bokoc thinks, but excluding the "Tickets" repo, I'd rather not get into the business of mandating labels at the repo-level. Maintainers will know best what works for their own workflows
<@pbokoc:fedora.im>
13:26:34
Yup
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:26:51
In my opinion, we, as a team, should focus on the organization-level labels because it impacts everyone working under `docs/*` on Forgejo
<@cstrauf:fedora.im>
13:27:32
It makes sense to have a universal set of labels for all repos. Makes onboarding to a different repo easier.
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:27:39
I've added descriptions to all of the current org-level labels. I am not sure if I have seen a written proposal for a base set yet? I could have missed it but I did not see it in the ticket.
<@pbokoc:fedora.im>
13:27:53
Yeah I mean the org-level ones should be ones that are universally useful. If someone wants to have more they can add repo-level ones.
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:28:24
I see lots of agreement and thumbs-up, so I am going to note that in the minutes
<@cstrauf:fedora.im>
13:28:38
If we do this right, most repos will probably be happy with what org-level labels there are.
<@cstrauf:fedora.im>
13:28:58
repo owners, that is.
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:29:26
!agreed As a team, we should focus this conversation about _organization-wide issue labels_ since it impacts all repos and contributors working under the forge.fp.o/docs organization. We prefer to not get in the business of standardizing repo-level labels, as we believe individual maintainers can decide whether greater specificity is needed beyond the organization-wide labels.
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:29:41
Agreed!
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:29:47
So, what do we think about what already exists?
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:29:57
Is it just something that makes sense to my mildly autistic brain? ๐
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:30:04
See picture here^^
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:30:32
Also, there are a lot of _exclusive labels_ used here
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:30:37
Exclusive labels are special label types
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:30:41
See the various, common prefixes?
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:30:53
When you use an exclusive label, Forgejo ONLY lets you use one label from that set of labels
<@cstrauf:fedora.im>
13:31:05
I think there's overlap between the "state" and the "?" prefix.
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:31:08
So, an issue cannot be tagged as `scope/new` and `scope/improvement`, for example
<@egret:fedora.im>
13:31:09
They seem good to me
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:31:33
How so? I could see how it is maybe confusing there.
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:32:02
To lay some historical context, the `state/` issues largely resemble the various close statuses that we had on Pagure.io
<@cstrauf:fedora.im>
13:32:09
Sorry, misread. All good.
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:32:14
The `?/` labels, in my brain, were to indicate some kind of team action needed
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:32:21
But again, my brain is not your brains ๐
<@cstrauf:fedora.im>
13:32:26
Looks fine to me, too.
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:32:41
Petr Bokoc: Since you opened the ticket, WDYT about the current org-level labels?
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:32:59
OK, no problem! I was hoping someone would be bold and tell me I was wrong and why ๐
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:33:23
Peter Boy (ServerWG, Docs): What about you too?
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:34:02
We have two unique labels and three groups of exclusive labels:
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:34:02
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:34:02
- good first issue
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:34:02
- `state/` labels
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:34:02
- `?/` labels
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:34:02
- `scope/` labels
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:34:02
- help wanted
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:34:53
!halp There is no documentation about our current label organization system. At the very least, if we do not approve new changes, we need to write up some docs for Docs Team members on how to use the org-level labels consistently.
<@pboy:fedora.im>
13:34:55
I think, many are useful for all repos. But I have to think about it. Maybe we should discuss that on discussion as preparation for next meeting?
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:35:28
Peter Boy (ServerWG, Docs): OK. In the interest of not being too long, maybe we agree to time-box the feedback to the next meeting, and lodge a final vote in the next meeting?
<@pboy:fedora.im>
13:35:33
E.G. I didn't know about those special, strukctured labels.
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:35:44
That allows two weeks for async discussion, and the next meeting, we ratify/approve/revise and move on.
<@cstrauf:fedora.im>
13:35:54
Does it make sense to discuss this in the ticket?
<@cstrauf:fedora.im>
13:36:00
In place, so to speak?
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:36:06
For sure! (if you are asking the room)
<@pbokoc:fedora.im>
13:36:19
Yeah definitely
<@pboy:fedora.im>
13:36:48
Well, in the ticket is useful. So you can easily recap it later.
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:37:35
Oh, one thing _I_ was thinking to bring up, but the `type/task` and `type/epic` labels feel like something we could drop from the Tickets repo
<@cstrauf:fedora.im>
13:37:55
Yes.
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:37:56
I think we are better served by milestones and project boards than those two labels
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:38:20
OK, sounds good. I think we have consent to finalize this in two weeks time with a vote, so let me record this for the meeting minutes too.
<@cstrauf:fedora.im>
13:38:22
Only keep "epic" if you want to scare people away from a ticket. ;)
<@pboy:fedora.im>
13:38:54
I'm still - since gitlab time - wondering what epic or gist exactly mean. Maybe I'm a newbe for many things.
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:39:24
Peter Boy (ServerWG, Docs): I think the idea is that an epic can have many tasks. Epics are higher-level, more abstract, and task issues would be supporting or blocking an epic issue
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:39:38
Epics are the high-level view, tasks are the nitty-gritty details
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:39:49
It is sensible but I don't think tracking this via issue labels really works IMHO
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:40:04
I'd rather make a milestone or a project board for what we might consider as an epic
<@pboy:fedora.im>
13:40:06
Justin Wheeler: thanks.
<@cstrauf:fedora.im>
13:40:20
If you're asking me, this comes from "agile methods" -- it's well worth questioning the sense behind some of these things. ;)
<@pbokoc:fedora.im>
13:40:42
Yeah lol
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:40:54
!agreed We are putting a team vote requirement on this ticket. All team members are encouraged to share feedback in Ticket #40. On the next team meeting on 19 May 2026, we will record a final vote, ratify, and move on. Docs Team leads will also work on a clear proposal for voting on, and also writing meta docs on the proposed labeling system.
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:41:24
I mean, I do think the idea is nice when you start getting into really big work that is difficult to trackโฆ but I just feel strongly that labels is not the way ๐
<@a-moor:fedora.im>
13:42:07
Not sure if I'm totally off, but are these guidlines/discriptions still relevant for new contributors, regarding the labels? https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fedora-docs/organizational/workflow/
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:42:26
!action @pboy @pbokoc Write a clear proposal for issue labels and update Ticket #40 with the proposal, so it is clear to all Docs Team members what is being voted on. Do this at least 48 hours before the next Docs Team meeting on 19 May 2026.
<@cstrauf:fedora.im>
13:42:43
We'd be in deep trouble if we had tasks that needed people to understand and apply agile methods before they can tackle them. Onboarding would be really hard.
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:42:56
!action @pbokoc Create a first-draft version of issue label howto for Fedora Docs team docs repo, prepare to share on 19 May 2026 team meeting
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:43:27
I have mixed opinions about it all, maybe I have project manager brain, but I think it does add a lot of complexity and makes onboarding trickier. True!
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:43:40
Anyways, I think we have discussed this with some clear agreements, outcomes, and actions.
<@korora:fedora.im>
13:43:41
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
13:43:42
Jocelyn Gould (UTC-4): Jocelyn Gould (korora) - she / her / hers
<@cstrauf:fedora.im>
13:43:43
Good point. Maybe link this in the issue.
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:43:44
We have two more tickets to go.
<@cstrauf:fedora.im>
13:43:51
Good point. Maybe link this in the issue. Might be worth updating.
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:43:51
!info +Present: @korora
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:43:57
Jocelyn Gould (UTC-4): Howdy! ๐
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:44:04
Anyone else on the issue labels topic?
<@cstrauf:fedora.im>
13:44:26
Andreas Moor's link is interesting.
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:44:26
## Issue labels & Ticket #40, going onceโฆ
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:44:50
Oh! I Missed that, thanks for calling it out!
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:45:15
Andreas Moor++ good sleuthing
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
13:45:17
jflory7 gave a cookie to a-moor. They now have 1 cookie, 1 of which was obtained in the Fedora 44 release cycle
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:45:40
!halp Instead of writing a new page, we have an existing page which likely could get a facelift. Yay for not duplicating ourselves! ๐
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:45:43
!link https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fedora-docs/organizational/workflow/
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:46:00
OK, I am just going to move on to the next ticket, the clock is ticking.
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:46:06
Thanks folks for the lively discussion here!
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:46:26
Meta topics can be boring, I know, but especially as we are getting more folks involved, being organized and structured will be key to make sure we are all moving in step together
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:46:36
Next ticketโฆ
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:46:51
!topic Ticket #19: Outdated docsbuilder.sh pulls Antora container w/ EOL nodejs
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:46:56
!link https://forge.fedoraproject.org/docs/tickets/issues/19
<@pbokoc:fedora.im>
13:47:32
Hristo was going to take a look at this, but he already said he was going to be AFK most of this week
<@pbokoc:fedora.im>
13:47:39
So no change here I guess
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:47:58
Seems like this is the repo where we need to changeโ
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:48:00
!link https://forge.fedoraproject.org/docs/docs-template
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:48:02
Is that right?
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:48:20
Then there is some work to make sure the various repos all have the new script, I knowโฆ
<@pbokoc:fedora.im>
13:48:36
Well, yes. The template repo is where we should make changes to scripts and configs.
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:48:46
Hristo Marinov: Do you want to stay on top of this one? If yes, would you mind commenting on the issue with an update so we can assign it to you? If no, then we can put it up-for-grabs
<@hricky:fedora.im>
13:49:06
Is't
<@pbokoc:fedora.im>
13:49:19
There's a separate issue for setting up submodules in all repos so the changes propagate to this one. When we do that we'll have a separate submodule repo.
<@pboy:fedora.im>
13:49:29
Somewhere is a repro for the script. If I remember correctls ind Apps & Web.
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:49:30
Aha, nice
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:49:41
To update it, you mean?
<@hricky:fedora.im>
13:49:47
Isn't the issue already assigned to me?
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:49:51
Oh, s/repro/repo/ I think
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:49:59
Yes, I think it is the template repo I linked
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:50:13
It is in our Forgejo org now
<@pboy:fedora.im>
13:50:17
Yes, our initiative plan includes to update and improve the script.
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:50:46
Oh, yes, I see you assigned now, I just noticed @tk2345 at first
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:51:02
Hristo Marinov: A comment update that you are working on it will be good though, I had no idea you were doing this until now.
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:51:20
!action Hristo Marinov Add a comment update on progress and next steps to Ticket #19 for updates to the Docs Template repo
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:51:28
In that case, if nothing else, we can go to Ticket #14โฆ
<@hricky:fedora.im>
13:51:29
I can also look at the `docsbuilder.sh` script.
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:51:32
Hristo Marinov: Anything you want to add?
<@pboy:fedora.im>
13:52:19
Hristo Marinov: would be great! let's talk about some ideas how to improve it.
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:53:12
Seems not โ going to push forward
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:53:24
!topic Ticket #14: Consolidate the Local Workflow Article
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:53:27
!link https://forge.fedoraproject.org/docs/tickets/issues/14
<@egret:fedora.im>
13:53:42
What we have so far:
<@egret:fedora.im>
13:53:42
<@egret:fedora.im>
13:53:42
https://forge.fedoraproject.org/egret/team-docs/src/commit/660af29c2442f1dced486d6d45912be54d5069d0/modules/ROOT/pages/contributing-docs/tools-edit-local-clone.adoc
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:53:43
Eli Ridge, Christian Strauf: You're up!
<@egret:fedora.im>
13:54:11
Jocelyn Gould (UTC-4) and myself
<@cstrauf:fedora.im>
13:54:43
As Eli Ridge stated, the guide is now ready for review. I'll have a look at it tonight.
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:55:31
Oops, sorry!
<@egret:fedora.im>
13:55:35
Jocelyn Gould (UTC-4) and myself have both been doing some test, so more would be helpful
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:55:37
!link https://forge.fedoraproject.org/egret/team-docs/src/commit/660af29c2442f1dced486d6d45912be54d5069d0/modules/ROOT/pages/contributing-docs/tools-edit-local-clone.adoc
<@egret:fedora.im>
13:56:06
Jocelyn Gould (UTC-4) and myself have both been doing some testing, but more would be helpful
<@egret:fedora.im>
13:57:08
It will be important to remember there will be a new #11 page to go along with it, for explanation and more
<@cstrauf:fedora.im>
13:57:52
Justin Wheeler: It'd be more appropriate to change the assignment to Eli Ridge and Jocelyn Gould (UTC-4). I only have the role of reading it and giving my 2-โฌ-cents. :)
<@egret:fedora.im>
13:58:01
#11 also in progress but thats another days discussion haha
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:58:22
First glance looks good, I would only use internal links instead of HTTPS links for Fedora Docs, but it is a minor nitpick: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fedora-docs/contributing-docs/asciidoc-markup/#internal-link
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
13:58:24
The content looks good
<@cstrauf:fedora.im>
13:58:55
Eli Ridge: Can you please link to the relevant repo and branch in https://forge.fedoraproject.org/docs/tickets/issues/14 ?
<@cstrauf:fedora.im>
13:59:10
I'd be happy to read the guide and supply feedback.
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
14:00:04
!halp All Docs Team members are encouraged to review the local authoring guide that Eli Ridge and Jocelyn Gould (UTC-4) have been hard at work on. See ticket #14 for details and to find a place to share feedback.
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
14:00:19
Eli Ridge, Jocelyn Gould (UTC-4): Is it reasonable to timebox a PR to the next Docs Team meeting?
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
14:00:21
On 19 May?
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
14:00:35
It could be before then
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
14:00:41
But it would be nice to give this a deadline so it gets done
<@egret:fedora.im>
14:01:20
Jocelyn Gould (UTC-4) do you think we need more testing or should let PR review do its thing?
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
14:01:27
(we might have to yield the meeting room in a minute for another meeting)
<@egret:fedora.im>
14:01:39
ah ok
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
14:01:55
Let's figure out a deadline async in #docs:fedoraproject.org, maybe?
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
14:02:26
!action @egret @korora Kick off a Matrix team room discussion about a deadline for Ticket #14 and what is sensible for your individual capacities
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
14:02:30
With that, I think we have to break!
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
14:02:34
!topic Open floor
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
14:02:42
!info No time today! We had a feature-packed meeting.
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
14:02:49
Thanks folks for your time and attention, as always.
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
14:02:52
Keep up the great work!
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
14:02:57
And see you next time ๐
<@pbokoc:fedora.im>
14:03:00
Thanks everyone!
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
14:03:06
!action @jflory7 Post a meeting summary from today on Fedora Discussion
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
14:03:08
!endmeeting
<@egret:fedora.im>
14:03:09
Thanks