docs January 2009

docs@lists.stg.fedoraproject.org

45 participants
80 discussions

CMS choice - Zikula is the new Fedora CMS
by David Nalley 28 Jan '09

28 Jan '09

Now that I have your attention: So we walked away from FUDcon with a couple of plans. Plan A: was to put a call out and see if we could get a group of people interested from a project willing to take on some of the implementation We had a number of other plans but let's forget them for a moment, but we circulated a call to several lists - and we received essentially a single response from Zikula Moreover the offering appears to meet the requirements that we stated. Which brings me to the question - why are we languishing when it comes to making this decision? We even regressed and talked about if/why we need a CMS (and I am one of the guilty parties here) This is plan A essentially fulfilled - I suggest we start making preparations to move forward and I've already committed to work getting Zikula packaged.

5 6

REMINDER: FDSCo Meeting today at 19:00UTC
by Eric Christensen 28 Jan '09

28 Jan '09

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 FDSCo Meeting today at 19:00UTC. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkmAVUsACgkQfQTSQL0MFMHYkwCgspXyJJaVaJhw3JFDk//Qmuuc w80AnA+c6Z1HpHhYDZu/FThwpNahexL8 =mIDy -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

Requesting SVN commit access
by Scott Radvan 27 Jan '09

27 Jan '09

Hi folks, Am writing to request write access to SVN for the Security Guide. I figured it might make things go a little quicker. It would also free up Sparks from putting in my changes so that he can focus on other stuff as well. So, is this OK with you guys? Cheers, -- Scott Radvan, Content Author Red Hat APAC (Brisbane) http://www.apac.redhat.com "Emancipation from the bondage of the soil is no freedom for the tree."

2 2

What is the purpose of a Docs CMS?
by Karsten Wade 27 Jan '09

27 Jan '09

I see this come up all the time, it's what you call a 'frequently asked question.' People wonder ... ... are we replacing the wiki with a CMS? ... is the CMS for authoring content collaboratively? ... or is the CMS for publishing already completed documents in various formats (Oo.org, XML, HTML, PDF, etc.)? In my mind, the CMS is for putting publishing of formal content in the hands of people who know and care. Writers should be able to publish drafts and completed versions. Editors should be able to fix and push updates. Translators should be able to complete, publish, fix, and update translations of guides. Our current system is essentially checking rendered content in to source control, and an auto-builder puts it on the web. Historically, this system was never well adopted, even by people who otherwise know and understand the tools. Instead, easier to use tools have drawn the attention and content, such as wikis and blogs. The adoption rates are staggering by comparison. The original purpose of getting a CMS was to make publishing easy. We already have a toolchain and process for getting content out of the minds of the subject matters experts, on to the wiki, in to DocBook XML, translated, and rendered to HTML, PDF, etc. All of that can now scale very well to larger and larger teams. The only missing piece is the ability to take all that content and put it on docs.fedoraproject.org. I purposely did not address the idea of people actually collaborating on content that has the CMS as canonical. When asked, we refer to the upstream fedorahosted.com versioning system as the canonical source. In this way, the CMS is similar to koji -- raw source turned in to packaged content. It is possible that a team would want to use the CMS as a working location. I'm tempted to cross that bridge when it happens, an idiom which here means, let's figure out how to make that work when we come to that decision point. Our choice(s) and experience with CMS systems is going to inform the Websites team on possible CMS choices for running underneath fedoraproject.org. In that case, the content there would probably live inside of the CMS as canonical. People would collaborate on it directly in the CMS. It would be great if the CMS or some other tool would give a collaborative, browser based wysiwyg editing experience for DocBook XML that is in a version control system. There are as many reasons why that won't work as there are to give it a try. In the meantime ... Make things clearer? Muddier? Slightly filmy but clear enough to drive? - Karsten -- Karsten 'quaid' Wade, Community Gardener http://quaid.fedorapeople.org AD0E0C41

8 13

Re: What is the purpose of a Docs CMS?
by A. Mani 27 Jan '09

27 Jan '09

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Jared Smith <jaredsmith(a)jaredsmith.net> wrote: > 1) Revision control. One of the things we'd like this CMS to do is to > provide revision control. So far, as I haven't seen a CMS that handles > revision control nearly as cleanly as either the wiki or using an SCM > system such as Subversion or git. A revision control system with Web interface like Mercurial can be integrated into most CMS and to different levels. > 2) Document creation and editing. Ideally, we'd have a wysiwyg editing > tool in the CMS that would output perfectly valid DocBook. I don't see > this happening any time soon. This means that whatever we create inside > the CMS doesn't lend itself well to repurposing or to easy translation. Full WYSIWG for Docbook is not really needed. We should have different tools that can deliver at least some level of automatic docbook xml. Docbook is indispensable for a project of this type. Can't VEX or LYX be adapted for the job? Best A. Mani -- A. Mani Member, Cal. Math. Soc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFJf5uSoIK4BlImohYRAuyuAKCspiCFWdF3y00i6wRQh2fSiSdWlQCeKa/i LVwS54FYwjDyOhiIVr5Oqmw= =BA9j -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Bad manners
by Paul W. Frields 27 Jan '09

27 Jan '09

Apologies for the recent spate of foul-language postings to the list. I've removed the offender and banned the email address in question. Paul

2 1

Docs at Fedora Activity Day (FAD) [SCaLE 7x 20 Feb.]
by Karsten Wade 27 Jan '09

27 Jan '09

There is a FAD[1] happening at the Southern California Linux Expo (SCaLE) 7x[2] on Friday 20 February. The Ambassadors have suggested that the FAD focus be on Ambassadors and Docs. (A FAD is a short event of Fedora contributors and participants that is focused on getting one or two activities done.) What would you suggest we focus on? Are you in or near Southern California? Trip plans below. My ideas so far: * User Guide for F10 -- all wiki work, can use the Ambassador hardware as systems to write from. * DocBook in a Day -- ~1 hour tutorial, then get busy doing a task in DocBook: * Convert F{9,10} User Guide to XML * Convert Installation Guide to Publican * Installation Guide Rawhide Camp -- Test rawhide installs against the IG and update content, make content projections for F11. * Security Guide Pen Testing -- Attack the concepts in the Sec Guide; configure systems to match SecG recommendations; whiteboard and LAN penetration testing. (Sort-of in order of difficulty.) Let's decide ASAP so Clint et al can get the word out about our FAD focus. My plan right now is to drive down from Nor Cal with Larry Cafiero and a few crew. Is there is anyone we should/could pick up on the way? SCaLE is being held at the Westin LAX, near LAX airport; we'll be coming down I-5 on Thursday, I reckon. If you know any Fedorans or potential Fedorans in the LA area, let's use the FAD as a place they can explore deeper participation in the project. - Karsten [1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Activity_Day_-_FAD [2] http://scale7x.socallinuxexpo.org/ -- Karsten 'quaid' Wade, Community Gardener http://quaid.fedorapeople.org AD0E0C41

3 4

Docs Leadership: How to get there from here.
by Eric Christensen 27 Jan '09

27 Jan '09

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 In today's meeting[1] we discussed new leadership in the Docs Project. There was a mixed discussion about what kind of leadership we needed and how to get them and the future of the Docs Project. At the end of the discussion Karsten left us with three questions that I'm now passing along to the list. Let's hear some ideas on this, please. The three questions are: 1) Do we want to hold elections or just have someone appointed by our current leadership to take the reigns. 2) Do we want a Steering Committee or Single Leader with Lieutenants to direct this project (basically a single leader with help)? 3) And the biggest question is do we want the Docs Project to remain a sub-project of Fedora or do we want to move to being a Special Interest Group (SIG)? These are big questions to answer so everyone's input will be especially important. [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DocsProject/SteeringCommittee/Meetings/Minut… Thanks, Eric Christensen E-Mail: sparks(a)fedoraproject.org GPG Fingerprint: CA02 4ACA EB6C 1A76 F0D6 1127 7D04 D240 BD0C 14C1 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkl3qaQACgkQfQTSQL0MFMEubQCgm806KLeKWC7unH1FgnWhu0NE jN0An2/wCqYN0O7t80WIs5SBY9AquAVD =H+b0 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

12 20

Re: What is the purpose of a Docs CMS?
by A. Mani 27 Jan '09

27 Jan '09

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 "Paul W. Frields" <stickster(a)gmail.com> wrote: > * The wiki allows everyone to contribute with zero barrier to entry. > Write and publish immediately. Since anyone can write anything > there, caveat emptor. > > * A CMS with an easy editor would basically be the equivalent of "a > wiki you can trust just a bit more," because there's an editorial > staff dedicated to it by virtue of it being the "official" > documentation site. > I think any good CMS would lessen the burden on the doc team considerably and improve work flow (in comparison with a wiki based system). Contributors may also have a more polished interface to use. Best A. Mani -- A. Mani Member, Cal. Math. Soc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFJfzU/oIK4BlImohYRAu/JAJ9Z/fJifyGtDlPijj5K4QzDVlMvrwCdGMzW DKkgGd2upSzfiF6SPvnLMwo= =mSIq -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

4 4

Alpha Release Readiness
by John Poelstra 27 Jan '09

27 Jan '09

With the Alpha Release for Fedora 11 scheduled for Tuesday, February 3, 2009, this means it is time to meet again with representatives from each of the teams to have our release readiness meeting. We usually have this meeting at 18:00 UTC (13:00 EST) the Wednesday before, which means next Wednesday, January 28, 2009, is the day. On Monday, January 26, 2009, I will be sending out the dial-in information and a meeting reminder to all the attendees. In the meantime I need to know who will be representing your group at these meetings for the Fedora 11 meetings. Usually this is the designated team leader, but I wanted to ask to make sure you coordinate within your team to make sure someone comes. When responding to this list, please CC me so that I am sure to see the reply. This message is going out to the respective mailings lists for these groups: Ambassadors Artwork/Design Documentation FESCo Infrastructure Marketing Quality Release Engineering Translation Websites Thanks, John

5 5

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

docs January 2009