HOWTO: Accessing re-organized Fedora Docs CVS

[Tommy Reynolds]

Uttered Karsten Wade <kwade at redhat.com>, spake thus:

> Or are you thinking of a way where we pick both, dependening on the
> writer's preference?

Captain, we don't usually ask the passengers about abandoning ship, sir.

My point is that from the contributors point of view, the boilerplate
modules are exactly that: unimportant unless they don't have something
you need; then you update them.  Checking in a document doesn't rely on
any particular revision of the boilerplate.

Since we don't envision the contributors distributing self-rendered
documents they shouldn't be concerned if the commons modules are not
up-to-the-minute.

Also, think of the process of a contributor creating a document and
then trying to import it into the CVS tree.  Their working directory
will be littered with files and directories they must _not_ try to
import, such as "CVS", "common", "xsl" and such, or they will royally
break things.  Can we rely on the newbie properly cleaning up their
working document before importing it?  Even if we provide them a
clean-up script, trust them to use it?  In contrast, look at the
3-step process I outlined for importing a document in the draft CVS
announcement that I sent to FPSco.  Even a manager could follow that, I
imagine ;-)

I firmly believe that the commons stuff should just be a black-box to
the contributor.  After all, shouldn't all peers be equal or are some
peers more equal than others ;-?

Cheers
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-dsco-list/attachments/20050510/0fb91a6d/attachment.sig>