Re: Documentation co-ordinator's tasks
Thank you for your mail.
We are in the Jeans, please remove our name from you mailing list
Thank you
http://www.adonweb.com/business/jeans.html
At 05:50 PM 6/26/98 -0400, karawi@axess.com wrote:
>Thank you for your mail.
>We are in the Jeans, please remove our name from you mailing list
>Thank you
>
>http://www.adonweb.com/business/jeans.html
>
>
>At 06:33 PM 6/26/98 -0400, Adam P. Harris wrote:
>>Ardo van Rangelrooij <ardo.van.rangelrooij@tip.nl> writes:
>>> First of all, I support you as the DDP co-ordinator.
>>
>>Oliver, I second you as well. Not that there's really a voting issue
>>about it..
>>
>>> So, I'm orphaning all the manuals with my name as maintainer.
>>
>>Ardo, yes a good idea.
>>
>>> This
>>> includes the meta manual, user's manual, the sysadmin manual, the
>>> netadmin manual, the dictionary, and the book suggestions list. The
>>> user's manual should be renamed to reference guide.
>>
>>Geeze I'm almost tempted to take that and outline it and then orphan
>>it. That would be slash-n-burn though wouldn't it.
>>
>>> For the book
>>> suggestions list and the dictionary Christian had the idea of making
>>> them web-based in the sense that anybody could submit new entries for
>>> them, provide updates of existing entries, etc.
>>
>>The Faq-o-matic is like that (although I couldn't help feeling that it
>>still needs agressive maintenance, i.e., taking good questions from
>>debian-user and populating the faq-o-matic). I think that's a good
>>idea, but don't fool yourself into thinking that a faq-o-matic
>>arrangement means it's maintenance-free.
>>
>>> We already talked about some design issues, but it got never beyond
>>> that point. I hope all of them get suitable parents. :-)
>>
>>We can hope.
>>
>>> "Oliver Elphick" <olly@lfix.co.uk> writes:
>>> > Since I have volunteered to take over the job of co-ordinator that has
>been
>>> > made vacant by Christian Schwarz's departure, I had better explain
what I
>>> > think needs doing, so that you can all decide if you want me to do it.
>>> >
>>> > 1. Move the DDP webpages onto a Debian machine (www.debian.org?); ask
>>> > Christian to alter the page at his site to point to the new
location.
>>> > Add Havoc's Debian Tutorial to the pages.
>>
>>Yes, and mark as orphaned what is orphaned.
>>
>>> > 2. Move the documentation source onto a Debian machine. Get from Ardo
>>> > or have people resubmit any contributions they have already made
>>> > and make sure that they are published.
>>
>>You should tolerate heterogeny. I.e., robert wants to keep source on
>>his own machine, and I guess manually update you; eventually he will
>>move to CVS.
>>
>>I think you should gently encourage *everyone* to use cvs.debian.org
>>but not make it a requirement.
>>
>>> > 3. Make packages of the various manuals, as soon as they contain any
>>> > reasonable amount of material.
>>
>>I think this is kinda a big job, no? Do you really want to do this?
>>I think you could still be quite useful w/o being the actual packager
>>of the various manuals. I'm worried you'll get too bogged down.
>>
>>> > 4. Arrange for people to be able to upload material and have it appear
>>> > in the development version.
>>
>>Development version of what?
>>
>>> > I'm not sure of the merits of using cvs to do this, because I think that
>>> > only the original author and the editor should be changing text. Is it
>>> > possible to arrange cvs with limited permissions? [Each chapter owned by
>>> > its author, and in the documentation group; only the editors are group
>>> > members; all document sources have 664 permissions.]
>>
>>Certainly.
>>
>>There's another reason cvs is useful: contributors can be assured of
>>patching off the *very latest* version. So it's revision control and
>>software distribution in that sense.
>>
>>> > Ideally there
>>> > should be some kind of server that accepts submissions from authors,
>>> > incorporates them and runs a make of the HTML documentation, and (on
>>> > success) copies the HTML and SGML onto the website.
>>
>>Yes, it looks like James will help you there.
>>
>>> > Any material submitted should either appear on the website or be
>rejected
>>> > within a week. Reasons for rejection would mainly be that the SGML
fails
>>> > to generate output; other circumstances are conceivable but would (I
>hope)
>>> > never arise!
>>
>>This reminds me of the linux patch page at
>>http://samba.anu.edu.au/linux-patches/ (isn't Jitterbug a .deb yet?).
>>
>>I think it's outside your scope as document coordinator to enforce
>>this for the documents themselves, although you might provide some
>>sort of infrastructure for doc maintainers to use for kicks. Don't
>>get too ambitious here, though, let's keep it simple.
>>
>>> > Any errors in content should become apparent if submissions are
>published.
>>> > If an author fails to correct an error quickly, I would expect to do it
>>> > myself, to avoid misleading readers. If any dispute arises, it would
>>> > ultimately go to the Technical Committee.
>>
>>Sounds good.
>>
>>Maybe it's my confusion, but I think you need a quick statement of the
>>*scope* of your duties.
>>
>>--
>>.....A. P. Harris...apharris@onShore.com...<URL:http://www.onShore.com/>
>>
>>
>>--
>>To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-request@lists.debian.org
>>with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact
listmaster@lists.debian.org
>>
>>
>
>
>--
>To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-request@lists.debian.org
>with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
>
>
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: