On Tue, 2004-08-03 at 20:32, Karsten Wade wrote: > > I think you are correct, and are welcome to start up a docs repository > of Fedora documentation. You can even have every single thing that is > in the Fedora docs project, thanks to the FDL. You may come here > looking for contributors, help, and ideas, although you may be told it's > no longer on topic. But what you describe is starting to sound like a > fork to me, and as such is outside of the scope of the Fedora docs > project. Not how I read it Karsten. > That said, if we want a short-term CVS holding tank to build a new > fedora-docs tree for submission back into the permanent Fedora CVS, and > you want to setup and administer that, I don't think it can hurt. As > long as it's understood that it's temporary. That's how I heard it. > > This example illustrates my point. When FC2test1 was coming out, I was > helping Ed Bailey with the release notes, and many of us realized we > desperately needed an FAQ for the test release. With the timing of the > test release, there wasn't time for me to write the FAQ and go through > the process to publish on fedora.redhat.com/docs. We also needed to be > able to add and fix questions/answers in the FAQ on very short notice, > like immediately. With no good solution in site, I decided to host it > on my people.redhat.com page. What makes you think things will change over time? Shouldn't the publishing cycle react to keep up with the things its describing? Do you expect RH to provide more people on the docs front? I don't. > > Now I have a small logistics problem. That URL is the well known and > propagated URL. It should be on fedora.redhat.com/docs/selinux-faq (or > something like that), and when I do move it over there, I will have to > figure out how to move visitors from people.redhat.com to > fedora.redhat.com, or face keeping multiple sites live indefinitely. Or run a redirect? -- Regards DaveP. XSLT&Docbook FAQ http://www.dpawson.co.uk/xsl
