On Sun, 2007-04-15 at 11:09 -0700, Karsten Wade wrote: > 1. Finalize name and structure of Fedora 7 edition of Desktop User > Guide > > * New title: Fedora User Guide > * New structure (using includes) > * GNOME and KDE on equal footing because each has its own spin > - Using the one section, two WMs covered plan: > http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-docs-list/2007-April/msg00068.html > * Encourage KDE SIG to join in > * Make F7 Deadline Sorry I couldn't make the meeting today, my schedule had been overfilled from several months ago. I picked up and read the IRC buffer and wanted to interject two cents (or less, depending on devaluation). The following may sound overly critical or not appreciative of the efforts of our friends and fellow contributors, but rest assured it's meant in the best possible spirit. I think restructuring this guide is not a good idea *right now* -- good in the long run, but I think it's more important to get what we have right rather than continually expanding scope. We have had a really hard time historically putting a foot down and saying, "stop, let's draw the lines here and make what's inside this border release-worthy." I absolutely agree that we need more KDE coverage, but I think that should be a post-F7 plan, and in the ~45 days we have before F7 release, people should work on improving the current state of the DUG (or whatever we name it). Once that's in shape, it's much easier for contributors to see how these documents should look in finished form, and write new pieces in a consistent way. OTOH, this is more difficult in wiki-land where everything changes all the time and nothing is mileposted. I have it on good authority that the Plone site will get some traction in the summer and we will be able to draft privately and release publicly, using easy wiki-like user tools for writers who like that sort of thing. :-) In particular, Mike McGrath mentioned he was going to try throwing some weight and skills behind it. I will also participate with him to the extent I'm able (and useful); maybe that will help with the larger problem of making contribution easier while maintaining some sanity to our release vs. draft status. So in short, let's fix the broken thing we've got before we start adding pieces to it. Again, this is just my viewpoint and I yield as always to the folks doing the real work, rock on. > === FUG Tasks === > > * John -- write up a checklist derived from critiques of the DUG that > specifies what each section needs to cover and how I agree, good tasking. There are a lot of great points in that review and it's well worth our time to apply that to the existing and future direction of the guide. > * FUG team -- stub out the new KDE content so KDE SIG and others can > easily contribute > * FUG team -- define 3 to 5 tasks per section, describe how to do them; > in the case of e.g. OOo and Firefox, point to specific, deep-linked > outside documents that have how-to information Good for future work in whatever capacity and schedule we engage. > * Status of delivery test4 release notes > - Need to deliver release-notes package this week for test4 spin > - Paul can update on this via mailing list OK, here's my little contribution for the week: * Late night last night (~2:30am), got everything validating. I had to remove only a couple locales in some documents (cs, gu, hr, ml, ms, zh_TW were most of them I think) because no one had provided any entity support for those locales. I think virtually none of these had substantial translations to speak of, but the postat target will tell that tale. * Tagged the content in all six relevant modules (about-fedora, docs-common, homepage, readme, readme-burning-isos, release-notes) with "release-notes-6_93". * Built some new dependencies (targets & rules) only for the release-notes in its Makefile. Now Jesse can do "make release-srpm" and everything works auto-magically. This required a bit of a hack, but it's not utterly horrible and really doesn't do much other than carry out the manual steps otherwise required. Since it's constrained to that single module, I don't see that as a bad thing. * Notified Jesse of the updates, got a confirmation from him. He is not putting together any candidate spins until Thursday. = = = I want to revert the entity behavior back to "xml2po -e" ASAP. Since we have tagging at this point, and we're looking at a test release, I'd like to make this change and free up the translators to fix the fuzzies that happen at that point. Any objections? Does everyone know what I'm talking about? And if so, could you *PLEASE* remind me to always -- no, **NEVER** change that option. EVER. **EVER**. Really, it was awful stupid. > * GSoC thinking > - Karsten to send an update to the list about accepted projects > > * Admin Guide discussion > - Robert (Pereira) is going to focus on this guide for F7; more > discussions on list Robert might want and need some help from a native English speaker as an editor. Can we get a community member (someone not on FDSCo, perhaps?) to volunteer to help him? > * L10N other > - Did not get to this item today > - On list discussions with Dimitris to follow Some of this above, and it looks like Dimitris will be hard to find for a while. Perhaps Thomas Canniot can help us as a bridge to L10N in his absence? He's always been great to deal with and pretty darn knowledgeable in the subtle ways of the L10N Force. -- Paul W. Frields, RHCE http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 Fedora Project: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PaulWFrields irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- fedora-docs-list mailing list fedora-docs-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-docs-list
