[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: FDSCo Meeting 2007-04-15 Summary



On Sun, 2007-04-15 at 11:09 -0700, Karsten Wade wrote:
> 1. Finalize name and structure of Fedora 7 edition of Desktop User
> Guide 
> 
> * New title: Fedora User Guide
> * New structure (using includes)
> * GNOME and KDE on equal footing because each has its own spin
>   - Using the one section, two WMs covered plan: 
>     http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-docs-list/2007-April/msg00068.html
> * Encourage KDE SIG to join in
> * Make F7 Deadline

Sorry I couldn't make the meeting today, my schedule had been overfilled
from several months ago.  I picked up and read the IRC buffer and wanted
to interject two cents (or less, depending on devaluation).  The
following may sound overly critical or not appreciative of the efforts
of our friends and fellow contributors, but rest assured it's meant in
the best possible spirit.  I think restructuring this guide is not a
good idea *right now* -- good in the long run, but I think it's more
important to get what we have right rather than continually expanding
scope.  

We have had a really hard time historically putting a foot down and
saying, "stop, let's draw the lines here and make what's inside this
border release-worthy."  I absolutely agree that we need more KDE
coverage, but I think that should be a post-F7 plan, and in the ~45 days
we have before F7 release, people should work on improving the current
state of the DUG (or whatever we name it).  Once that's in shape, it's
much easier for contributors to see how these documents should look in
finished form, and write new pieces in a consistent way.

OTOH, this is more difficult in wiki-land where everything changes all
the time and nothing is mileposted.  I have it on good authority that
the Plone site will get some traction in the summer and we will be able
to draft privately and release publicly, using easy wiki-like user tools
for writers who like that sort of thing. :-)  In particular, Mike
McGrath mentioned he was going to try throwing some weight and skills
behind it.  I will also participate with him to the extent I'm able (and
useful); maybe that will help with the larger problem of making
contribution easier while maintaining some sanity to our release vs.
draft status.

So in short, let's fix the broken thing we've got before we start adding
pieces to it.  Again, this is just my viewpoint and I yield as always to
the folks doing the real work, rock on.

> === FUG Tasks ===
> 
> * John -- write up a checklist derived from critiques of the DUG that
> specifies what each section needs to cover and how

I agree, good tasking.  There are a lot of great points in that review
and it's well worth our time to apply that to the existing and future
direction of the guide.

> * FUG team -- stub out the new KDE content so KDE SIG and others can
> easily contribute
> * FUG team -- define 3 to 5 tasks per section, describe how to do them;
> in the case of e.g. OOo and Firefox, point to specific, deep-linked
> outside documents that have how-to information

Good for future work in whatever capacity and schedule we engage.

>   * Status of delivery test4 release notes 
>   - Need to deliver release-notes package this week for test4 spin
>   - Paul can update on this via mailing list

OK, here's my little contribution for the week:

* Late night last night (~2:30am), got everything validating.  I had to
remove only a couple locales in some documents (cs, gu, hr, ml, ms,
zh_TW were most of them I think) because no one had provided any entity
support for those locales.  I think virtually none of these had
substantial translations to speak of, but the postat target will tell
that tale.

* Tagged the content in all six relevant modules (about-fedora,
docs-common, homepage, readme, readme-burning-isos, release-notes) with
"release-notes-6_93".

* Built some new dependencies (targets & rules) only for the
release-notes in its Makefile.  Now Jesse can do "make release-srpm" and
everything works auto-magically.  This required a bit of a hack, but
it's not utterly horrible and really doesn't do much other than carry
out the manual steps otherwise required.  Since it's constrained to that
single module, I don't see that as a bad thing.

* Notified Jesse of the updates, got a confirmation from him.  He is not
putting together any candidate spins until Thursday.

= = = 

I want to revert the entity behavior back to "xml2po -e" ASAP.  Since we
have tagging at this point, and we're looking at a test release, I'd
like to make this change and free up the translators to fix the fuzzies
that happen at that point.  Any objections?  Does everyone know what I'm
talking about?  And if so, could you *PLEASE* remind me to always -- no,
**NEVER** change that option.  EVER.  **EVER**.  Really, it was awful
stupid.

>   * GSoC thinking 
>   - Karsten to send an update to the list about accepted projects
> 
> * Admin Guide discussion 
>   - Robert (Pereira) is going to focus on this guide for F7; more
> discussions on list

Robert might want and need some help from a native English speaker as an
editor.  Can we get a community member (someone not on FDSCo, perhaps?)
to volunteer to help him?

> * L10N other
>   - Did not get to this item today
>   - On list discussions with Dimitris to follow

Some of this above, and it looks like Dimitris will be hard to find for
a while.  Perhaps Thomas Canniot can help us as a bridge to L10N in his
absence?  He's always been great to deal with and pretty darn
knowledgeable in the subtle ways of the L10N Force.

-- 
Paul W. Frields, RHCE                          http://paul.frields.org/
  gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233  5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
      Fedora Project:  http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PaulWFrields
  irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]