docs November 2009

docs@lists.stg.fedoraproject.org

34 participants
79 discussions

Issues with Release Notes translations
by John J. McDonough 18 Nov '09

18 Nov '09

This is really to set up a discussion probably between me and rudi when the sun comes up for him, but everyone should at least be aware of this problem. This morning I noticed that zh-CN had reached 100%, but that translation has been thick with errors for the past few weeks, so I decided to send a note to trans-list identifying the types of errors. I was later surprised to see that rudi had pushed the zh-CN to docs.fp.o, surprising since the document wouldn't build, at least, as of a job that started about an hour before rudi pushed it! Anyway, when I looked through the document, I noticed a number of entire sections that were untranslated. Odd, since Transifex shows it at 100%. Now I have to admit, I've been happy to see translations complete, and generally I take a quick peek to see that they look about right, but I haven't been going through documents in languages I can't read in their entirety. I looked at a couple of other docs on docs.fp.o and some of the same sections were untranslated. I was about to blame Publican for producing an incomplete pot (sure, blame it on Publican), but then I found some docs where those same sections were translated. That leads me to suspect that something in the interaction between git and Transifex is causing the issue. As you may or may not be aware, we have been branching liberally to try to keep the translations straight. I suspect what happened is that some of the pos were checked out from transifex when we branched, and the old po overwrote the new po. Normally git would scream bloody murder (and make your life miserable) if you tried to do this sort of thing, but depending on how Transifex interacts with git, it might work around this problem. I'm not sure the best way to correct this. I suspect we need to identify the problem pos and merge them with the current pot, but I don't know enough about Transifex to know what this might break. --McD

2 2

Re: Branch 'f12zeroday-tx' - po/pl.po
by Piotr Drąg 17 Nov '09

17 Nov '09

W dniu 17.11.2009 18:42, Transifex System User pisze: > po/pl.po | 1305 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------------------- > 1 file changed, 656 insertions(+), 649 deletions(-) > > New commits: > commit 8070f99d6a7ad8c6419e88260b50d046eb2d66df > Author: raven<raven(a)fedoraproject.org> > Date: Tue Nov 17 17:42:19 2009 +0000 > > Sending translation for Polish > We did proofreading a bit late because of some random real life troubles. Could you please re-generate Polish release notes with this new revision? -- Piotr Drąg http://raven.pmail.pl

2 1

Check your guides!
by Eric Christensen 17 Nov '09

17 Nov '09

Please go to docs.fedoraproject.org and check your guides to make sure that they are being displayed properly and that the links are functioning properly. I know there are a couple of problems but I need to make sure that we find them all. --Eric

3 4

[[DocsProject/Licensing/FAQ]] still refers to the OPL
by Mel Chua 17 Nov '09

17 Nov '09

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DocsProject/Licensing/FAQ still refers to the old OPL license - I put a reminder on the talk page (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Talk:Docs_Project_licensing_FAQ) to revise it and linked to the https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Relicensing_OPL_to_CC_BY_SA explanation page. This is the main page on docs licensing that you find if you follow https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal/Licenses. I'd go and make the changes myself now if I weren't boarding a plane to Tokyo in a couple minutes. --Mel

2 1

Announcement tomorrow
by Paul W. Frields 17 Nov '09

17 Nov '09

I'll be using the text found here for tomorrow's announcement to fedora-announce-list: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_12_Announcement I noticed we've dropped our old legacy habit of producing a humorous preface, in favor of a more cut and dried approach. I'll likely precede the text with a short (promise!) thank-you note and a URL for http://get.fedoraproject.org at the top, for people who want to cut to the chase. Thanks to everyone who worked on the announcement text. -- Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug

3 3

Re: [Design-team] Documentation Logo Design
by ryan lerch 16 Nov '09

16 Nov '09

Luya, Publican (the toolchain that produces these documents) has a tight structure built around Products (and their logos), Book Titles and Sub Titles. The elements that are seen in the first mockup are essentially the "Front Cover" of the book, and IMO are needed in this circumstance. Changing these elements is also a lot harder than changing the image that rudi requested, as the tool itself (Publican) would need to be changed. That said, i agree with the word "fedora" being used too much (especially with the non logotype "fedora" that was in my first design) So, with some help and guidance from Rudi and Mo, i decided to go with a simpler text only header to replace the "made with publican" image. A test book with the new image can be viewed here: http://ryanlerch.fedorapeople.org/fedora-docs-logo/html/index.html cheers, ryanlerch On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 4:59 AM, Luya Tshimbalanga <luya(a)fedoraproject.org> wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 11/16/2009 04:39 AM, Ruediger Landmann wrote: >> On 11/16/2009 06:18 PM, Luya Tshimbalanga wrote: >>> Here is illustration the document: >>> http://luya.fedorapeople.org/images/mockup-redundancy.png >>> >>> You noticed there are at least four Fedora names on that page alone >>> which is an overkill >>> for header. >> >> Sorry Luya -- I get a 404 for that URL >> >>> I made illustration for suggestion below: >>> >>> http://luya.fedorapeople.org/images/mockup-suggestion.png >>> >> >> And 404 for this one too. >> >>> I understand about the ears. As highlighted, there are a lot of repeated >>> words. I made an alternate version that preserve "Fedora" wordmark >>> (original color and black version included) for image replacing "Made >>> with Publican" >>> >>> http://luya.fedorapeople.org/images/fedora-docs.png >>> >> >> This isn't bad; but I find the change in colour between the word >> "Fedora" and the word "Documentation" quite jarring. >> >>> http://luya.fedorapeople.org/images/fedora-docs-alt.png >>> >> >> 404 for this one >> >>> http://luya.fedorapeople.org/images/fedora-docs.svg > Links fixed. > > > - -- > Luya Tshimbalanga > Graphic & Web Designer > E: luya(a)fedoraproject.org > W: http://www.thefinalzone.net > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) > > iEYEARECAAYFAksBoR0ACgkQaS6HaNQHFTmOIgCfaiOWY6JiMzx0DHVR1w494zdW > 5qMAn0ZiPOoiA+v3QKUs4q5vQs68kXqQ > =cj9B > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > > _______________________________________________ > design-team mailing list > design-team(a)lists.fedoraproject.org > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team > >

1 0

Introduction and Command Line Survival Guide
by Vedran Miletić 16 Nov '09

16 Nov '09

Hi everyone, my name is Vedran Miletić and I work as a teaching and research assistant at Department of informatics, University in Rijeka, Croatia. I teach lab exercises in Operating systems and auditory exercises in Computer networks, and in Operating systems we learn how to work in Linux environment. A the moment, we use "Mandrake Command Line Reference" dating back in October 2004. Certainly, lots of things remained the same, but some have changed. In order to make a new textbook for our students and new Fedora users interested in command line in general, I applied to this group. I see there is already a draft of Command Line Survival Guide at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Docs/Drafts/CommandLineSurvivalGuide and it covers pretty much what I want. I tried contacting James McElhannon who was working on it, but the domain of his mail adress is dead. That being said, I would like to take the work on this and continue where he left it, if someone is willing to point me how to do it. Hope we can create something great and useful (and ready in time for Fedora 13 release!). Regards, -- Vedran Miletić

4 5

Photographs of hardware in Fedora documentation
by Ruediger Landmann 16 Nov '09

16 Nov '09

The new Fedora Wireless Guide includes photographs of different types of wireless adapter: http://sradvan.fedorapeople.org/Wireless_Guide/en-US/html-single/#sect-Wire… In each case, the manufacturer's logos and/or (obviously) the design of the hardware itself is visible in the photograph. Some questions: 1. Are the manufacturer's labels on the hardware and/or the design of the hardware itself (particularly the styling of the USB adapter in the first picture) likely to be protected by copyright? If so: * Is our use of the image to illustrate a generic component of a particular type likely to be covered by "fair use" for publication in the United States? * Is this protection likely to cause problems for people who want to reuse our content? (I'm thinking in particular of places that have no "fair use" or equivalent concept in their copyright law, or for reusers who want to use the image in a completely different context) -- and if so, do we care, or are reusers on their own here? 2. Could using specific pieces of hardware to illustrate a generic type of hardware be construed to be an endorsement of this particular piece of hardware or its manufacturer? If so, do we want to do this in our docs? Cheers Ruediger

2 1

handling attributions for Docs
by Karsten Wade 15 Nov '09

15 Nov '09

Now we have a clear need for attributing source information: thanks to being relicensed under CC BY SA 3.0 means we can import lots of good content and so we're likely to do so. Efficient attribution is now important. There are two parts to this discussion: * Technical - how it works in DocBook and Publican * Brand - how does the Fedora Documentation Project want to attribute I was going to look at it from a social angle, but I think the brand angle overrides the social angle. Read on for more. == Technical proposal == To handle copyright attribution, I recommend we adopt this approach: * For single or a few imports of a chunk of attributable content, use a <footnote>. Attribution happens on the page it occurs. Example: Pulling a description of AES encryption from Wikipedia for the Fedora Security Guide. * For longer imports, blends, or remixing of content, use <legalnotice>. Example: All of the people who work on a guide over the years would be lists in a standard format under the primary Fedora/Red Hat legal language. For the <legalnotice> usage, we would need: * A standard format for all attributions, to make it fair, clear, equitable. Alphabetical, for example. * A change to Publican(?) to look for and use a file, en-US/Attribution.xml, if it is present. This allows attribution to be kept within the main document source tree. == Brand proposal == This is a proposal only affecting Fedora-branded works. An upstream, such as the "Linux Security Guide" (https://fedorahosted.org/securityguide/) can attribute as it sees fit, just as a downstream "Red Hat Enteprise Linux Security Guide" can attribute as it sees fit. Currently, for some works, we have primary authors in a long list on the front cover of a work. We've long discussed swapping that for "Fedora Documentation Project". Especially as we work with a larger group, the list of authors on the front cover grows. It visually competes with the Fedora branding. In other parts of the Fedora Project, we don't see the authors presented in that fashion. Anaconda is "Anaconda Team <anaconda-devel(a)redhat.com>". This is more the norm for FLOSS projects. This is how a "Fedora Docs Team" focus looks in practice: http://docs.fedoraproject.org/release-notes/f12/en-US/html/ A good bonus to that would be having either a link to the project page or text inline that links to the mailing list or project page. Another idea is to have a notice in the authorship/editorship section, "For full attribution of contributions to this work, refer to the [legalnotice]." One reason for picking a standard is to set the expectation for how we attribute under the Fedora brand. When we put up individual names, it creates a competitive space. External content originators that are remixed may demand front-page attribution. This causes the visual appeal to diminish while increasing the attribution maintenance. Having _all_ Fedora-branded guides follow the same standard that puts the Fedora brand first does the best service to the Fedora Project. It gives us the least headaches. I think it is the right thing to do. What do you think? - Karsten -- Karsten 'quaid' Wade, Community Gardener http://quaid.fedorapeople.org AD0E0C41

3 3

Re: [Design-team] Documentation Logo Design
by Ruediger Landmann 15 Nov '09

15 Nov '09

On 11/16/2009 12:21 PM, Luya Tshimbalanga wrote: > On 11/15/2009 05:43 PM, Ryan Lerch wrote: > >> Here is a mockup of how it will look when integrated with publican: >> http://ryanlerch.fedorapeople.org/fedora-docs-logo/mockup.png >> > Problem with that layout, Fedora brand is redundant (top left and > middle). Reader already know the > document is for Fedora. > FWIW, the big Fedora logo in the middle only appears on the first page (title page) of a doc. Here's a more typical page: http://docs.fedoraproject.org/release-notes/f12/en-US/html/sect-Release_Not… the new logo is to take the place of the boilerplate "Made with Publican" logo. Note too that the logos at the "ears" of the page are hyperlinked; the Fedora logo links to www.fedoraproject.org and the "Made with Publican" logo links to docs.fedoraproject.org

2 1

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

docs November 2009