On Sat, Apr 11, 2015 at 09:04:14PM -0600, Pete Travis wrote: > I'm thinking about how stale we want to let a book get before we stop > publishing it. Right now, the de-facto policy is to stop maintaining a > guide for a release when the release goes EOL, but on migrating to a new > publishing system, we'll have to decide if we want to republish > _everything_. Since I'm a little out of touch with Docs myself these days... What are the group members' opinions on publishing whole books, vs. looking at innovative ways to publish and maintain smaller content chunks? This latter is a goal FPL Matthew Miller has been talking about of late. Is the Docs team large enough to do both well? > It seems like publishing the currently maintained versions, plus the > release under development, plus the most recently EOL'd release, should > be enough. Early adopters are covered, stragglers are covered for > their upgrade, stubborn EOL users get the appropriate amount of support, > and nobody gets really stale, potentially incorrect or harmful > instructions. I'm throwing this on the agenda to discuss at the next > meeting, if you can't make it, please reply here. -- 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/ The open source story continues to grow: http://opensource.com -- docs mailing list docs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/docs
