On Wed, Feb 04, 2009 at 07:32:22PM -0500, John J. McDonough wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dale Bewley" > <dlbewley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > To: "For participants of the Documentation Project" > <fedora-docs-list@xxxxxxxxxx> > Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2009 7:17 PM > Subject: Re: F11 Alpha Release Notes one-sheet > > >> Is the goal for the Alpha relnotes[1] to be as close to complete as >> possible? A snapshot up to this point? If so, why isn't it based off the >> page[2] which transcludes all the current beats? There are beats updated >> for F11 which aren't included on "one-sheet". > > Alpha and beta relnotes are only the highlights. On my small beats it > looks as if I will have around 100 changed packages. How are you going to > describe that on one page? I'd hope we're not summarizing 100+ changed packages on any beat, right? That would seem like overkill to me. Off the top of my head I can't think of a justification for telling people about any specific package that wasn't widely used and had changed substantially enough to be notable. I think last release cycle I removed that information from one of the beats, by general consensus, because it differed so much from the way all the other beats worked. For general package updates, someone could always run the script for diff'ing the repos -- I don't recall its name or where it's kept, but I know it exists -- and post that information somewhere suitable on the wiki. >> I do realize there are cutoffs and deadlines for moving content around. >> I just had the impression last time that content moved through the >> pipeline quickly/automagically after being updated in a beat. I could be >> deluded though (I know Karsten worked his butt off). > > Karsten and Paul both. My read is that the process is pretty painful, but > for 10 (and 11) not so bad because it wasn't my problem! Once the initial conversion to XML was done for a Preview Release, changes tended to be easy to do. A team of two could usually get them done in an evening or less. The procedure would consist of looking at the history of each beat page, seeing there were revisions since the port to XML, then looking at the total diff to see the changes. On occasion that would expose another quick edit needed for style or grammar, which we'd make. Then we'd look at the new diff including our changes, and just edit it into the XML, commit, etc. After all that is done, we'd make the new POT, update the PO, and push everything out. >> /me still stubbornly thinks of the wiki content as the end result rather >> than a way point. I realize that isn't practical for L10N though. > > It really should be pretty close, although I know I was responsible for > some of Paul's frustration with 10. The only real difference should be a > little formatting, especially if we can get that outline straight. Really? I don't recall any particular frustration with you! Either I have a short memory, or all's well that ends well. ;-) > If Ryan can pull off this periodic translation he wants to do, then we > will be able to see the result a lot better, and hopefully avoid a lot of > last minute pain. We eschewed doing a big publication for Alpha or Beta because there were so many details still in flux that people outside the Docs team wanted the flexibility of adding or revising content quickly on the wiki for the days immediately around the release date. If it's not too much of a pain for someone to keep up with as far as republishing, great. We found it too demanding given our resources at the time, but it's good to see that things are evolving to the point where it's not as much of a concern! -- Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug
Attachment:
pgpmS4Jf1vdS1.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- fedora-docs-list mailing list fedora-docs-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-docs-list
