On 02/11/2010 11:17 AM, Susan Lauber wrote: > The time rapidly approaches when we need to start updating the guides > for a new version. In this example - start work on F13 version of the > guides. > Basically - I wanted to know where to start contributing changes > intended for the F13 version on guides. And where to point new > contributors as well. > > In the meeting tonight, a discussion started about branching philosophies. > #action laubersm Bring branching topic to docs list to decide how we > want to do this going forward, and record it for posterity. > > I have looked at a couple of guides in git. They seem to have a > master, F11, F10, etc, and various F??-tx branches. > I think we generally agree that the F??-tx branches are for the > translation teams. > The rest seems to indicate a need for a F12 branch and then master > becomes F13. > But when should the F12 branch appear so that work on F13 can begin? > > I did not look at all the guides - there may be other schemes in use > already. > > So I see 2 major parts to the question: > 1. Is this the branching scheme that works best for Fedora Docs group > and guides? > What are the alternatives? > pros/cons? etc > The alternative is not branching. Just to build and forget. This isn't the kindest approach and goes against some of the theory of open source. I would say branch at release. We do not have the resources to maintain old forks of books but we should keep the source for posterity. > 2. WHEN do we branch? I would argue for at the date of translation string freeze. Only critical updates (like an error which causes users to delete their root partition) found in translation should get updated after that point. > Should the F12 branch been made at release of F12 so that master moves > to the next version right away? It should be made at translation. I would argue for having master to just keep going. This allows for continual development. I know how much some people *hate* RAD, agile or SCRUM approaches but unless I get three major contributors that is the only feasible approach to take. Fedora continually changes during a release. It is not the same Fedora by the end of the 6 months when the next one starts coming out and the documentation is usually out of date for most interfaces of developed projects. I would argue here for a master/lastest branch and then legacy branches. > If so, how do we handle mid release updates to a guide? We should have a master or latest branch and some method for pushing more frequent updates. The present method, with the CVS/php/voodoo monstrosity is a failure. It takes days to push a book and translations. This is not a conductive environment for updating documentation. I know someone will respond with the "Zikula is coming" or some such but this is really holding us back. Is there anything stopping Infrastructure just giving us limited access to puppet so we can push updates in a more timely and effective fashion? Until something changes in Infrastructure do not expect *any* mid release updates, ever. It is too much work and takes a fanaticism and commitment which I certainly lack. Masochism is not everyone's idea of a good time. > Should master stay the current version until the next release alpha? > Which is about now. > Or even longer? > Master should just go with the latest and greatest. I think this is one of Fedora's strengths which the Documentation Project should latch onto and hold for dear life. We can channel the energy which most people, including myself, love about Fedora and open source; the life which drives continual change. People want to document new features and technologies far more than they want to do many other things. We need to channel this energy into our docs. We need people working on documenting the latest and greatest bits of code. Master should be as fast as the writers want to ride the lightning, if that is Rawhide, so be it. I am presently intending to go this direction with the Virtualization Guide. Chris -- docs mailing list docs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/docs
