On Wed, 2005-06-08 at 13:56 -0700, Karsten Wade wrote: > On Wed, 2005-06-08 at 12:03 -0500, Tommy Reynolds wrote: > > > Possible solutions are: > > > > A) Document, document, document the proper (nonstandard) > > procedure for importing a document and ask newbies to follow > > it unerringly; or > > > > B) Provide a shell script that will do the cleanup and importing > > for them and ask that they use the script instead of doing the > > CVS import themselves. We'll still have to clean up the > > mess when they ignore the script and try to learn about CVS > > by doing the import manually; or > > > > C) Write a PGP(?) / Wiki(?) / HTML(?) / Java(?) page that will do > > the selective importing if the newbie just identifies the > > top-level directory in a form. Very similar to attaching a > > file to a Yahoo mail message. or > > > > D) Keep the "docs-common" as a peer directory that needs be > > updated only when the CVS structure changes or when a document > > fails to build because of a missing entity. > > Ah, I see. > > Having docs-common as a peer directory seems to be the least > mainentance, hassle, and chance of breaking in a bad way. > > We can easily have a list of common errors in the Documentation Guide > that mean you need to look for an update to docs-common. > > Options A, B, and C require too much for the value they bring. > > Option D only risks minor problems for the user that teaches them better > how to fish when it happens. I don't think B sounds too hard either. And it goes hand-in-hand with the Documentation Guide's "LearnAsYouGo" slant. I'll make this part of the considerations for the hands-on portion, with the idea that it will be equally helpful to participants who don't need as much hand-holding. > > My point is the current setup has a painless, no-error-possible > > document import. I don't really care if a stylesheet changes an > > indent from 0.5in to 0.56in because the document rendering on the > > local system isn't critical. Anyone wanting "proper" documents can > > just update the "docs-common" before sending the PDF to the printers. > > I agree with this except that the current setup does need a tweak, which > is why we have this thread. Elliott pointed out the messiness of all > the little directories that docs-setup brings down, and he was echoing > something that I thought. Already we have four directories that need to > be brought down to peer level and updated separately. > > Reading between the lines in your post, I *think* you agree with this > reason for moving everything into a single module, docs-common. Makes sense to me too. -- Paul W. Frields, RHCE http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 Fedora Documentation Project: http://fedora.redhat.com/projects/docs/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- fedora-docs-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-docs-list
