Adding a couple of people to the discussion I'd like to supply an opinion to the discussion, but who may not be on the list. On Mon, 2008-02-04 at 22:10 -0500, Eric Christensen wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > A week ago I made some changes to the Encryption and Privacy Guide [1] > (EPG) that was going to spread out and categorize all the information > that you could possibly put into such a document. Quaid gave me a > moment of pause when he said that we need to focus on Fedora-specific > information. > > I agree and disagree at the same time. I don't think we need to > reproduce a bunch of information that is already out there but I've also > been taught to not keep telling people to go somewhere else for information. > > Here is what I propose... > In order to provide a comprehensive guide that covers privacy and > encryption that is available to Fedora I think we should cover in depth > the Fedora-specific information while providing a summary and alternate > paths for getting information for items that are more Linux-specific. I don't see a problem with this idea. You understand what the catch is and avoid it with the summary approach. We don't want to be maintaining miles and miles of content that is going to change from outside of Fedora on a regular basis, but we don't need to write it so that it is subject to regular change. All of those topics can have a small section summary of the technology. One way we could help the users is to identify the background they may want to skip and make it easy for them to learn how to skip it. Such as using a regular naming scheme and organization, what-is followed by how-to: GPG What is GPG How to use GPG SSH keys What are sshkeys How to create and use sshkeys File system encryption What is FS encryption How to encrypt a file system ... There could be more common section types, such as "Best practices", "Recipes", etc. depending on what the topic is. Following a consistent pattern helps the reader navigate to what they want. With each topic added (FS encrypt + gpg + ssh + ...) there is a non-linear increase in work load to maintain future versions. Once written it is less work to maintain it, but each section contains what and how information that has to be re-checked every six to twelve months. This does make for more modular technical editing, where someone can check all the what-is content purely from their own knowledge without having to check any implementation (how-to) details. > There is already non-Fedora-specific information in our Docs (like a > guide for using GPG [2}) that could be rolled into the EPG as a summary. > ~ This would allow a guide that would be encompassing while not rewriting > the book on everything security. One thing that is different there is that the GPG guide is specific to contributors. We would have to look at making it generic, then maintaining a separate page in the Get Involved Guide that told specifics about using GPG with the Fedora Project as a contributor. That seems like a sane approach. - Karsten -- Karsten Wade, Developer Community Mgr. Dev Fu : http://developer.redhatmagazine.com Fedora : http://quaid.fedorapeople.org gpg key : AD0E0C41
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
