-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 02/26/2015 04:49 AM, Brian (bex) Exelbierd wrote: > On Feb 25, 2015, at 2:54 AM, Jeff Fearn <jfearn@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> Signed PGP part >> On 02/24/2015 04:49 PM, Brian (bex) Exelbierd wrote: >>> Should we have styling more like the getfedora.org site? Fedora Magazine? The Spins page? I think we can easily take some of their visual elements. >> >> Possibly, I'm only making the base for that kind of work to follow on. > > cool. > >>> The layout is quite nice though. Once we are ready to generate docs in whatever tool-chain we want, it will be awesome. >> >> This is orthogonal to such changes. > > I realize that. What wasn’t clear to me from your email is whether we could hook this up today or not. It also wasn’t clear whether this was prepared to be tooled or was a tool. And this is why devs should not be writing stuff for Human consumption :) This is baked and ready to go, just waiting on some changes for unrelated RH docs requirements to release a new Publican. And to be very clear, the script I linked to could be used to regenerate the current docs git published site by adding one parameter to the command line. $ rebuild_site.sh -p $path_to_publican_git -w $path_to_docs_site_git Some of the old books might need some XML cleaned up if you want to build all the old versions :) Once we push publican 4.3.0 the script will need a tweak so you don't need to set -p ... I'll try and get that done today if I have time. Oh and if you want PDFs you need to change the formats in the script, they take too long for me :} >>> Did you give any thought as to how to help users understand why we have three categories of documentation for each release? >> >> You mean the groups? e.g. "Getting started", "System administration", etc? > > Actually I meant Fedora vs Fedora Contributor vs Fedora Draft Documentation. Ah, they are products. > I don’t know if those are clear. Since you were re-imaginging the site, I was curious what your thoughts were. I think Fedora & Fedora Contributor make sense as they are different kinds of documentation. I think beta docs could be handled the way RH does it by having a -BETA version of the product. I think the Documentation product is an artefact and that books using that probably need to move to Fedora or Fedora Contributor. >>> Should we now group by the fedora.next groupings? >> >> This is orthogonal to this demo as you can easily change groups once the >> updated tool chain is being used. > > It could be orthogonal or not depending on how we do the grouping and how the groups I mentioned above are generated. What I mean was that the separation is a parameter and that those decisions can be made post update. >> FWIW If you take a look at the Red Hat docs you will not see this kind >> of division even though RH have been doing variants for a long time. > > I am familiar with the RH platform doc set. I also know where some of the rough edges with the variants are. However, the RH customer, it seems to be believed, is different from the Fedora customer. So what is good for the goose may not be good for the gander. Yeah I guess I just don't want that discussion impacting the update because it's easy to change later on. >> I think it'd be a lot of work and/or duplication to split up the docs to >> cover variants. > > I think there are options around a content strategy that could be very interesting if we go down a split doc set road. I think the real trick here will be sharing content between the variations without making the source highly complex. There have been a couple of attempts at this but they have not been very successful, so it'll be interesting to see what people come up with to make a usable system. Cheers, Jeff. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.14 (GNU/Linux) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJU7lQnAAoJELs3R4zxGZvKiOwH/0JwWJ5VkxH4HWdwPK7KEP/q An7NSOgY/lmWlvVVG9Uc9MHtrXIVxMCW5Ut30klbfnwLXxznwUcipG4M5FQoa3w2 bCgmkEmRGhTftK8qSuCLv9Hq1aRIpG/yJGpXM9PDcaeZQmUpzfo9jLnEeOs7/D83 7NrloFYrXekD/8YXZtL7SqEpmiXHsazwKEvuixhIoRa/+aynYPSjKiPbBe9Bxfas r2c5sjRoVlLWGJTtw0FyDOx0FF0Xx0Cl6ZMUaQVFpGTrk7Y9nUkBgmlgiH7n4Op+ UiKF2B26Z9vKG6GLRVnK4lk2lEUVHCzCjyZS0kWDuBsq1KQEGgii8ESWZ5Od64Q= =kTeX -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- docs mailing list docs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/docs
