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

Re: Plone to DocBook solution

Hash: SHA1

Jared Smith wrote:
> Earlier this year I hear talk of a Plone solution designed to let
> contributors write in Plone, and then have it converted to DocBook and
> then go through a workflow where it would be edited, checked into CVS,
> etc.
> I'm just curious where that ended up.  (I know, most of you don't know
> me from Adam, so who am I to be asking?  Let's just say I know DocBook
> and I am willing to help with Fedora docs.)  Would someone mind
> letting me know what the status is?

It's still in the works. I've had some setbacks moving from Plone 2.5.3
to Plone 3 (as a Plone developer). I'll try my best to put together
something for beta testing but I'd really like to look at some other
unrelated changes Ive been playing with (mainly getting rid of the
Makefiles). I'll try to put together an email with a score of
suggestions to test the waters for where we could go with this. Right
now the buildd (the daemon that interacts between plone and cvs) uses
the existing Makefiles but requires them to be error free and also
requires the innermost Makefile to be valid for building the document.
It's very fragile to say the least. I'm working out a pure python based
build system that will replace the Makefiles with simple/nice config
files for each module, among other things. I'll try to send this email soon.

Jonathan Steffan
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org


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