fedora-docs-list Digest, Vol 6, Issue 3

[Karsten Wade]

On Tue, 2004-08-03 at 10:01, redwire at therockmere.com wrote:
> > My $0.02: CVS is still locked because we don't yet have a workable
> > protocol for prioritizing, assigning, accepting, editing, QA/QC'ing, and
> > automatically Web-fielding documents. I think (hope?) Red Hat people are
> > working on the infrastructure part of that. We are here to talk about
> > those protocols, and not to just grow a plethora of third-party
> > repositories for docs.
> >
> 
> Paul;
> 
> I understand that we maybe waiting on RH, but waiting on something that
> 'may' happen when 'someone' gets to it is like being the bridesmaid and
> never the bride. [also, Sounds like Redmond, WA]

I think you are correct, and are welcome to start up a docs repository
of Fedora documentation.  You can even have every single thing that is
in the Fedora docs project, thanks to the FDL.  You may come here
looking for contributors, help, and ideas, although you may be told it's
no longer on topic.  But what you describe is starting to sound like a
fork to me, and as such is outside of the scope of the Fedora docs
project.

If instead what you want to do is help the Fedora docs project succeed
at delivering high quality documentation, then I really think you should
reconsider your offer and ideas in terms of what it will take to get
this group to that goal.  In other words, your intention is clear and
good, but I don't think setting up an ad-hoc CVS is going to help us, at
least until we are clear what even needs to be put in it.

That said, if we want a short-term CVS holding tank to build a new
fedora-docs tree for submission back into the permanent Fedora CVS, and
you want to setup and administer that, I don't think it can hurt.  As
long as it's understood that it's temporary.

This example illustrates my point.  When FC2test1 was coming out, I was
helping Ed Bailey with the release notes, and many of us realized we
desperately needed an FAQ for the test release.  With the timing of the
test release, there wasn't time for me to write the FAQ and go through
the process to publish on fedora.redhat.com/docs.  We also needed to be
able to add and fix questions/answers in the FAQ on very short notice,
like immediately.  With no good solution in site, I decided to host it
on my people.redhat.com page.

Now I have a small logistics problem.  That URL is the well known and
propagated URL.  It should be on fedora.redhat.com/docs/selinux-faq (or
something like that), and when I do move it over there, I will have to
figure out how to move visitors from people.redhat.com to
fedora.redhat.com, or face keeping multiple sites live indefinitely.

> I'm not trying to be rude or insulting, but IF a working documentation
> structure isn't able to be Resolved\Approved by those people that are
> spending their own free time on it, then 'Houston, we have a problem'.

To a large degree, we-the-group _haven't_ been spending our time on it. 
We've been writing some stuff, not quite enough, and saying that we
can't do anything until we have every piece of the structure in place.

For example, up until the separation of Fedora CVS from internal Red Hat
CVS sometime over the last few months, there were several of us here who
could have been making commits for the project.  The project pages even
specify that the project leader can do this.  None of us, myself
included, thought to ask if we could ease Tammy's burden some and move
the project along at the same time.

I'm asking for that now.  And looking around, I see that we are not
where we should be for the eventual arrival of Fedora CVS.

> There is a difference between a releasing documents, especially those that
> can be change so easily like XML, and making revisions and what seems to
> be occurring; saying 'well, unless it is 100.01% perfect nobody gets to
> see it'.

Yes.  At the same time, we want to have a high quality, well processed
document, so that calls for a bit more process than "just write it, post
it, and fix problems when people report them."  There is a balance
here.  It makes sense for us to be more diligent in testing and editing
each other's documents.  Paul speaks about this in his first reply to
this thread.

Still, as you say, we don't want to get stagnate ...

> The advantage of OPEN SOURCE is the FREE EXCHANGE of information. This is
> most importantly includes documentation. Red Hat gave the Fedora project
> to the OS community because their focus shifted to Enterprise level sales
> and service to make a profit. By extension that means that WE are able to
> set standards.

Agreed.  Let's discuss what those should be and how to deliver them.

> If FC is to progress to FC3, and gain traction, then it requires, and
> demands, a large, free and accessible Document set.
> 
> While there are a number of 'document' sites. I will say that most of them
> are a hodge-podge of minor tutorials and\or a document here or there on
> FC. Not a dedicated single source for FC in an easy to read, DocBook
> format.

Yeah, I'm frustrated too at the lack of document set for Fedora after
all this time.  Still, no one can do it by themselves.  Let's get the
content written, work up a process from ad-hoc through to repeatable (at
least), and just be so fscking ready when CVS opens up that we can roll
straight forward into FC3 with a lot of momentum.

> Lastly, I understand that I am new to the group. I understand that I don't
> post alot and am still trying to master DocBook syntax and d'l the
> examples, but I will mention that I have 10+ yrs of computer programming &
> training experience.
> I know from experience that if you don't provide a basis for knowledge for
> others to build on then the product, no matter how good, is destine to
> fall by the wayside.

Word.

> [aside: until recently monster.com had a job posting for a
> DocBook person at RH. It is since been removed]

Since you opened the can, I don't mind a shameless plug  as a reward for
reading this far ... :) ... There is at least one position for a tech
writer at Red Hat.

http://redhat.hrdpt.com/cgi-bin/a/highlightjob.cgi?jobid=7

This is the position that authors the System Administration Guide, so
requires a fair amount of Linux and writing expertise.

If you are a perfect fit for this position, feel free to contact me,
I'll see your resume gets to the right person.

- Karsten
-- 
Karsten Wade, RHCE, Tech Writer
a lemon is just a melon in disguise
http://people.redhat.com/kwade/
gpg fingerprint: 2680 DBFD D968 3141 0115  5F1B D992 0E06 AD0E 0C41