On Fri, 2004-07-30 at 09:12, Dave Pawson wrote: > On Fri, 2004-07-30 at 07:34, Karsten Wade wrote: > > > Sorry if I'm being dense, but I don't understand how having public CVS > > resolves the problems of Fedora docs? > > > One problem I see it addressing. > There is no (apparent) way to get documentation *to* Fedora without it? > > Even a statement, drop it into this repository and it will be reviewed > in two weeks, would be a help. > > I.e. why should I write if there is no way to get stuff into Fedora? > That's the issue being addressed... or more accurately, not being > addressed, despite promises some time ago. You are, how do you say?, "spot on." Can't argue with the facts, although I'm trying to figure out how I, at least, can be a conduit to get documentation into Fedora. Still, that's not a scalable model, eh? ;-) My concern right now, though, is this: what if open CVS access were done tomorrow? How ready are we for it? 1. What is our process to decide who gets write access to fedora-docs? 2. What should be in there _right_now_ that is not? 3. What bugs are there to fix in the existing documentation, so contributors can start working on them? 4. What should be on the fedora.redhat.com/docs pages _right_now_? 4.1 How are we going to manage multiple documents across multiple versions? The left hand navigation bar is going to fill up pretty quickly at this rate. As for 1, I haven't the foggiest idea what Cristian's process is going to be. We should at least discuss it, though. The other items are something we can do something about. - Karsten -- Karsten Wade, RHCE, Tech Writer this .signature subject to random changes http://people.redhat.com/kwade/ gpg fingerprint: 2680 DBFD D968 3141 0115 5F1B D992 0E06 AD0E 0C41
