Closed aswin-alexander closed 2 years ago
10/4 TSC update
Notes:
Next steps:
After some discussion, here's what we're proposing
Needs
Solution
We can start with this^ approach, then if Confluence goes well, we can consider moving all GitHub wiki items to confluence, but as an optional post-step
Question: do we want to start using GitHub Wiki when we have a tentative plan to move those items to Confluence "if it goes well"? If we presume success - assume Confluence Wiki features are good and use it for item (2). Then we still have GitHub Wiki as a fallback if Confluence is deemed not good enough.
This approach gets us to the end state more quickly, without requiring an extra step through GitHub Wiki, and still leaves the same fallback position as your proposed step.
It's a good point. The rationale is it feels like there's not a lot of love for confluence within the dev bench, and devops has already begun a migration to GH wiki
The inclusion of GH wiki seems like where people are naturally gravitating, so I think it could be worthwhile to let that play out and see where it lands us.
Thoughts @PARitter?
I can work with that.
Accepted. @ildikov to coordinate migrating contributor docs to GitHub Wiki, @aswin-alexander to coordinate migrating other artifacts to Confluence
For reference: The Linux Foundation Magma Confluence can be found at https://wiki.magmacore.org/spacedirectory/view.action.
Currently, MCF artifacts are not
For example, TSC captures minutes here, and videos here which are discoverable via the calendar but not on the website
This proposal is to align MCF with other LF efforts (eg: ORAN, ONAP) by using LF hosted confluence