On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 10:31:54AM +1000, David O'Brien wrote: >> > I'm working on a project that currently produces a community version and > an Enterprise version of both the software and the documentation. The > community version of the documentation is written and maintained on a > wiki, and the Enterprise doc using DocBook xml. Being the only writer on > the project means the community version of the doc is always out of date > (I focus on Enterprise doc). This is a new project and community > engagement is still developing. Maintaining both versions of the doc to > keep up with the software is not possible for a single writer, and quite > frankly not desirable. I'm researching how I might develop all of the > doc in a single language (DocBook xml) and deliver it to both > destinations using publican. One of the reasons we embraced the wiki is because it greatly increased the community contributions. Be aware that limiting source to DocBook XML also limits the number of contributors. This is of course without the Magic Grail that we all want -- an easy way similar to a wiki or wysiwyg-via-WebUI that reads and writes to valid DocBook XML. In the meantime, by moving to stand-alone repositories for each guide on fedorahosted.org, it pushes more in tools and decision making to the individual contributor teams. It's really easy for each guide to set its own policy on contributions and processes for the canonical source. > I found a bunch of info on the website about community contributions and > the use of WikiText, OOo, plain text, etc., if they weren't comfortable > with the idea of using xml. I'm looking into whether supporting > contributions in a wide range of formats is feasible. It takes a team, in our experience so far. Some of what you read is outdated; we're busy working on renaming, categorizing, and cleaning up that content. In general, we support: * Wiki-only for shorter how-to/tutorials maintained inside and outside of Fedora Docs Project. * Wiki that gets converted to XML when it's ready for translation (Release Notes does this, several other guides have undergone this transition.) In this case, usually each version is worked via the wiki first. * DocBook XML-only content (Installation Guide, Security Guide). These are full-length books that are not worth pushing back and forth to the wiki. The wiki is lossy; you lose contextual meaning to the mark-up. > I didn't determine from what I read at what point contributions are > reviewed. (I didn't read the whole site, of course, just looked for the > important bits.) Are reviews performed on WikiText, converted DocBook, > elsewhere? How do you determine who can review and approve docs? How do > you manage docs that have been submitted, converted, and published? Are > edits/updates performed in WikiText and reconverted? Probably the best overall page, still sure to have some inaccuracies: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DocsProject/WorkFlow 1. Group collaborates on wiki content: * Beats for Release Notes are technology specific sections to be included in larger chapters. * One chapter per wiki page for guides written on the wiki. 2. Content is ideally edited as it is written. Writers learn as they go how to improve their writing. Editors don't save all the work for the end. All this work happens in the wiki. 3. When content is ready for translation-then-publication, it is converted to DocBook XML in either the fedora-doc-utils or publican toolchains. 4. Translated and base-language versions are published on docs.fedoraproject.org. > What degree of sharing occurs between Fedora and RHEL documentation (if > any)? How is this handled? Historically there has not been any, save an occasional release note. To catch an opportunity like this, someone needs to be willing to lead the effort on the document. This means trading writing and editing for project management, growing trust in others to do the write/edit work. There has to be an upstream somewhere that we can use. One method is to put the upstream content inside of Fedora. It is then usable by downstreams such as RHEL. This has not happened so far. Currently, there are several guides available or soon available as stand-alone upstream projects on fedorahosted.org. In this case, Fedora is as much a downstream as RHEL and CentOS are. In the case of FreeIPA content, for example, I would expect the latter situation would probably occur. We could want to use some or all of the FreeIPA content in, for example, a Fedora Deployment or Fedora Administration Guide. Downstream appliance makers could use: (FreeIPA + Fedora) - (cruft) - (Fedora mark) + (Fedora Remix mark) - Karsten -- Karsten 'quaid' Wade, Community Gardener http://quaid.fedorapeople.org AD0E0C41
Attachment:
pgpf5cmpS9ZsO.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- fedora-docs-list mailing list fedora-docs-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-docs-list
