search

Particular / docs.particular.net

All content for ParticularDocs
https://docs.particular.net
Other
103 stars 300 forks source link

Update Azure docs to v7 #1255

Closed yvesgoeleven closed 7 years ago

yvesgoeleven commented 8 years ago

This is an epic, which covers all changes needed to the documentation in function of the next version of our azure support, v7. It references issues for Azure Storage Queues Transport, Azure Servicebus Transport, Azure Storage Persistence, Azure Blobstorage Databus and Azure Cloudservice Hosting

General

Crossed out items are handled in https://github.com/Particular/PlatformDevelopment/issues/718 as part of beta release or https://github.com/Particular/PlatformDevelopment/issues/753 as part of RC

Azure Storage Persistence

weralabaj commented 8 years ago

@Particular/azure-maintainers Given that there's a huge number of issues in docs, is there anything we could do to help you? Would it be possible to identify issues that don't require intimate Azure knowledge, or pair with one of you to move it forward?

Scooletz commented 8 years ago

In my opinion, at least the following do not require intimate Azure knowledge:

1272 - based on https://github.com/Particular/NServiceBus.AzureStorageQueues/issues/25

1268 - based on https://github.com/Particular/NServiceBus.AzureStorageQueues/issues/27 for ASQ

As soon as I close the saga related issue, I'd be more than happy to pair with some with docs knowledge to consume some of the issues above.

weralabaj commented 8 years ago

Awesome @Scooletz ping me when you're ready.

SeanFeldman commented 8 years ago

There are 2 types of doco we need: upgrade guides (if needed) and re-designed azure "components" (and by components I mean transports, persistence, etc). If we could have upgrade guides that would mention things and point to the "components" doco, that would be optimal.

Example: NHibernate upgrade guide.

weralabaj commented 8 years ago

@Particular/azure-maintainers Given that effort for this one is huge, I think we need a proper TF formed that will get it done. I volunteer from the docs mainteners side, but we need at least 2-3 people that worked on Azure. To get it ready I suggest adding info on who has knowledge to tackle each issue (e.g. "Topologies #1259 ( @Scooletz) or "Topologies #1259 (anybody, refer to this and that MSDN doco)"and form the TF.

yvesgoeleven commented 8 years ago

@weralabaj count me in for this TF

weralabaj commented 8 years ago

OK one more thing I forgot - please, indicate when you can get started on this. There's still some dev work going on, right?

yvesgoeleven commented 8 years ago

@weralabaj I want to prioritize this over any additional dev work

melkio commented 8 years ago

@weralabaj I'd like to help

SeanFeldman commented 8 years ago

I'm in @weralabaj

Scooletz commented 8 years ago

@weralabaj I can't imagine not being in this TF!

yvesgoeleven commented 8 years ago

@Scooletz fixed :)

yvesgoeleven commented 8 years ago

probably best to ping @dbelcham @WilliamBZA @DavidBoike as well as they worked on the persistence part, their eyes (and hands) will be valuable to us :)

WilliamBZA commented 8 years ago

Yeah, sure. I'm in. Currently involved in another TF and a few other items, so won't be able to give full commitment but I can definitely take part.

yvesgoeleven commented 8 years ago

@WilliamBZA added you to the list

yvesgoeleven commented 8 years ago

@Particular/platform-dev-squad As documentation seems to be part of the WIP limit now, I would like to nominate this issue for next in line. Documentation is the only thing missing that would allow us to release the azure related bits to our customers, and should therefore be prioritized imo. The taskforce is defined, all subtasks are identified, we are ready to go

andreasohlund commented 8 years ago

It's a high prio but atm getting the beta binaries prepared and fixing the rabbit message loss bug has higher prio (next in line) but this one should be a next in line after that.

yvesgoeleven commented 8 years ago

@andreasohlund I don't think users will do much with binaries without at least basic doco in place (or they will have a very bad experience and give up quickly)

yvesgoeleven commented 8 years ago

In short I believe we need this before we can go into beta with azure customers

andreasohlund commented 8 years ago

Are all doc items on this card beta blockers?

melkio commented 8 years ago

ASB, for instance, has a lot of new features and a lot of changes. Without documentation users can't understand well how transport works. Going into beta without docu in place could create issues to customers and/or a lot of questions (support cases?) to us

andreasohlund commented 8 years ago

I agree that this should be a prio, but non of the azure bits are in the first beta wave

https://github.com/Particular/CustomerSuccess/issues/207

so getting the binaries ready for that wave seem more important to me:

https://github.com/Particular/PlatformDevelopment/issues/706

@Particular/platform-dev-squad thoughts?

SeanFeldman commented 8 years ago

Upgrade guides are needed. Modification to existing documentation is needed. Especially the doco referenced from upgrade guides. And those will be required for for the "Azure wave" which will not have the time equivalent to the time invested in the general (core) doco.

melkio commented 8 years ago

@andreasohlund maybe unblocking upgrade guides for transports ( #1271 and #1275 ) could be a first step to start working on Azure related docu. We can't think to start beta without them, and we can't start working on them just before beta for azure users starts

weralabaj commented 8 years ago

@andreasohlund how about putting perf tests on hold for a few days until we get free slot? I think this doco is crucial to get before beta (at least some parts of it) and it'll take a while to get done.

weralabaj commented 8 years ago

Scratch it - https://github.com/Particular/PlatformDevelopment/issues/673#issuecomment-206185305 - is it true that neither Azure nor Rabbit are part of beta?

andreasohlund commented 8 years ago

Not part of private beta phase one, but part of the public beta for the entire platform so they are part of that's the next focus once the phase 1 binaries are up

WilliamBZA commented 8 years ago

Stop-starting other issues to bump this into WIP is a less-than-ideal solution and I'd much rather prefer to wait for a WIP slot to open because of the completion of a previous task. If there are tasks in progress that aren't critical to V6, that highlights a problem with the WIP selection process.

If we stop another task to start this one, there is no guarantee that the previous task will still be deemed as important enough to start again once another slot opens up.

weralabaj commented 8 years ago

Good point @WilliamBZA, sorry ;) I think we have two candidates for resolving soon and we should focus on them today.

andreasohlund commented 8 years ago

If there are tasks in progress that aren't critical to V6, that highlights a problem with the WIP selection process.

Is there anything in-progress that you would say fits this description?

andreasohlund commented 8 years ago

Issue raised for ASB raised https://github.com/Particular/PlatformDevelopment/issues/718, I've proposed that it will be next in line (issues for ASQ and storage etc will follow)

SeanFeldman commented 8 years ago

Updated ASB section to reflect what items will be handled as part of the ASB Beta issue #718 in PlatDev.

andreasohlund commented 8 years ago

Removing the task force from this one, all work will be done/tracked as part of

https://github.com/Particular/PlatformDevelopment/issues/718 https://github.com/Particular/PlatformDevelopment/issues/723 https://github.com/Particular/PlatformDevelopment/issues/729

and upcoming issue to get the above RC ready. We'll keep this one open until all items here are assigned to a relevant plat dev issue.

indualagarsamy commented 8 years ago

ping @Particular/azure-host-maintainers @Particular/azure-service-bus-maintainers @Particular/azure-storage-persistence-maintainers @Particular/azure-storage-queues-maintainers

Any updates or progress?

SeanFeldman commented 8 years ago

A few minor items are not finished yet. I suspect they are either WIP or done, but not tracked.

SeanFeldman commented 7 years ago

Looks like we can close this "umbrella" issue. In case individual issues are not addressed, they can be tackle independently by maintainers.