On Mon, 2009-03-30 at 12:23 +1000, Joshua Wulf wrote: > Based on feedback on this list, I've put together a proposal for the > Fedora Packaging Committee meeting. > > You can view it here: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Publican_Documentation_Packages > > The intent of the proposal is to move forward on the bugs mentioned in > it and get a raft of documents into the next release. > > Please let me know what you think. > > Josh > > -- > Joshua J Wulf > Engineering Content Services > Red Hat Asia Pacific > > eml: jwulf@xxxxxxxxxx > tel: +61 (0)7 3514 8140 > mob: +61 (0)431 929 675 > tmz: GMT +10 > > (0) - omit when dialling internationally > Opps... I hadn't caught up on posts made over the weekend before posting the forward from Bugzilla. Thanks for writing up the proposal. It would be nice to have a stream-lined validation process for Publican-created documents. I still have a concern about the product number in the package title. Whether the FPC wants to accept it is one thing but I still feel that Publican should provide support for NOT wanting it there in the first place. There are guides out there that are obviously driven for a specific version of Fedora and there are guides out there that aren't. Those that aren't shouldn't have to have the product number. We are going to have to look at how we do the languages, too. We will have to change the way we do business to make that happen properly. Eric
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
