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

minutes for 19-Apr-2005 meeting

Ideally, just the <meeting></meeting> is what mattered, but I am taking
editors license to include a bit of the out-of-band conversation that
cleared up a few items:

## begin
<quaid> Hi, welcome, [paste prepared remarks here]
<quaid> oops, forgot to prepare some
<stickster> Auspicious!
<megacoder> Suspicious!
<quaid> really though, thanks for taking your personal time to attend to
this meeting and your Fedora work.
<quaid> even though Tammy, Mark, and I work at RH, unlike developers,
Fedora time is not neccesarily part of our job descriptions.
<quaid> so we too feel (some) of the pain.  Okay, break out the violins.
<quaid> so, knowing we are going to wander off-topic _anyway_ might as
well just jump into the agenda
* tcf hears music
* stickster did read it
<quaid> just to enter into the record the motion by elliss to use
timespans of release cycles in the charter instead of fixed months
* quaid will use this log to edit from later
<G2> yes, as they drift a little
<quaid> a drift you can almost set your watch by.
<quaid> Mark and I worked on the charter to attempt to focus it on scope
and not process/how-to
<quaid> I left in some process just so it would have a home for now, and
that stuff is likely to move on to a process-doc later.
<stickster> N.B. the process docs link that is to be populated later...
that was a good move
<quaid> other than that, I'm married to the ideas but not any of the
details, per se.
<quaid> so tear it apart, or whatever, if there are any comments:
* quaid waits
<elliss> I like the document a lot.
<tcf> quaid: do we have to be called "fud-suck"
<stickster> I thought it was F-Disco
<quaid> eff-disco
<G2> where's the link again, I;m blind
<G2> got it
<G2> I was one too high
<tcf> under name, it says: 'The Fedora Documentation Steering Committee,
also known as FDSC. Convention suggests latter be pronounced "fud-
<quaid> oops
<G2> ;-)
<quaid> feel free to edit :)
<stickster> At least now it's in the log... Is there any succession plan
<quaid> that's true, I'll capture it later.
<quaid> stickster: how do you mean?
<stickster> I'm thinking of, you know, freak accidents... assassination
<quaid> man, it's sometimes spooky how much we think alike.
<stickster> jk... actually, more in terms of nominations for
replacements, voting them in, and so forth
<stickster> Is that too processy?
<elliss> Yes.
<quaid> I dunno
<quaid> I had stuff like that in there, and took it out to leave for
Mark to fool with./
<elliss> IMHO voting gets devisive
<elliss> e.g. Debian
<stickster> Good point
<stickster> Perhaps this is something best left to the chair, i.e.
simple appointments
<G2> yes. The right people will become appart. Let's use the kernel
<stickster> Good enough
<G2> aparent
<G2> whatever spelling
<quaid> consensus!
<megacoder> How do we get a sufficient population for a meaningful
<quaid> I tend to agree ... but we can consider this a bit more when we
work on the process docs, I do like a contact to spell how you get into
_and_ out of it.
<quaid> megacoder: I think we'll get more from the community than from
within RH
<stickster> quaid: Right
<megacoder> Suits
<G2> Can we start on
<stickster> megacoder: I think the population will also increase with
the opening of CVS and the feeling that people are joining a thriving
<quaid> G2: as an agenda item or are you offering to start editing it?
<G2> quaid: either
<elliss>  Is the plan to formally agree the Charter next meeting ?
<quaid> G2: two steps, almost there
<quaid> elliss: I was hoping to agree this meeting, but we may need to
postpone so we can have all present/all heard.
<elliss> Ok. 
<stickster> Why don't we go ahead and move to accept the charter,
pending those changes just mentioned in the log?
<quaid> but if there are no other points for the charter discussion ...
<megacoder> Isn't a quorum a sufficient quantity?
--> mrj (~mjohnson cpe-024-163-064-126 nc res rr com) has joined
<quaid> oh, true, do we have a quorum?
<quaid> hey!
<mrj> howdie
<quaid> that was spoooky
<stickster> Sweet
<quaid> very
<G2> what about the face-to-face meeting
<stickster> I think it's a good idea... not a requirement but strongly
<quaid> G2: it was a suggestion from gregdek that I liked ... but darn
if I know right now how to implement it.
<elliss> seconded
<quaid> mrj: we were just moving to accept the charter, pending the few
changes mentioned in the logs
<G2> aye, but you'll all have to come to Aberdeen ;-)
<quaid> I'm not necc. ag'in that.
<mrj> quaid: ok. just looked it over. i vote yes
<megacoder> How about asking for some sponsorships from the distro
<G2> I accpet the Charter
<tcf> I accept as long as "fud-suck" is removed ;-)
<quaid> tcf: so noted :)
<megacoder> Seconded
<G2> ha
<quaid> any nays?
<mrj> nay
<quaid> yay
<mrj> way
<stickster> ?
<quaid> stickster: mrj is naying that there are nays, and I am cheering,
and he is using Valley slang "Wayyyy ...."
* quaid swings his gavel
<quaid> once
<quaid> twice
<stickster> quaid: Outstanding
<quaid> charter accepted
* tcf notes that this is what happens when too many grammar nerds get
<mrj> the crowd goes wild...
* stickster applauds, then realizes he is alone
<G2> mrj: You don't sound very sick? ;-)
* tcf hears white noise
<megacoder> White smoke is being reported... more to follow
<quaid> all right, the charter as a topic is always open, can be brought
up in the forgotten "Misc." section of the agenda ...
<quaid> moving on ...
<quaid> mrj: I reported that I heard you went home feeling icky
<quaid> so, about CVS stuff
<mrj> true, hence no process docs
<quaid> we had a wee discussion with Elliott this morning here
<stickster> Right
<quaid> the gist of it was, he agrees with the minimalist approach.
<G2> Does anyone have a list of docs in the CVS tree? I'll check it out
and check. What is active?
<quaid> tell people to play nicely and communicate, then give them CVS
<quaid> G2: the fedora-docs module just got imported into /cvs/docs this
<G2> ok. sorry carry on.
<quaid> stickster: since you brought it up and are interested, can you
write something up that tells how FDP uses CVS?
<quaid> perhaps on the Wiki.
<stickster> When someone comes in with a tutorial idea, I think it would
be a good idea to be able to assign them a folder, and acl them... 
<quaid> yes, 'zactly
<G2> stickster: I agree.
<stickster> quaid: OK, I'll draw something up and post over the next few
<G2> stickster: It gives them a nice feeling that we care and want their
<stickster> G2: right
<stickster> quaid: Tech P-of-O...
<quaid> stickster: just the single addition to that idea that is docs
specific, how about:
<quaid> * editors and writers of a particular doc are the only ones who
shouldbe mucking about
<elliss> Yes
<tcf> we also need to update the cvs section in the participation guide
on fedora.redhat.com
<quaid> * every tree should have one single person who is accountable
<G2> yes, no rm -rf *
<stickster> tcf: If no one objects, I'll take that piece on too
<quaid> G2: that's fine, just don't commit that change :)
<megacoder> Shouldn't accountability devolve onto the editor or the SME,
or someone else?
<quaid> megacoder: good question, I'm split on that.
<elliss> I'd rather the writer
<megacoder> I see the editor as more than a wordsmith reviewer.
<stickster> Sorry, P-of-O was: who right now has the ability to make a
folder and add a new person to the acl? Is there more to the process?
i.e. Follow the CvsAccess instructions
<quaid> megacoder: I think there are two levels of editor
<quaid> there is "an editor" for a guide, who is a contributor to the
doc, and could be the accountable one
<quaid> and there is "the Editor" who can muck about wherever s/he
pleases to make stuff right for a release, etc.
<elliss> Isn't the second type us ? 
<stickster> quaid: Don't forget there is also a technical reviewer in
there possibly
<quaid> this is a concept that is probably not analogous to software
<tcf> silly question, but what is the name of our CVS module?
<quaid> elliss: yes, basically
<megacoder> Who is to do the content management?
<quaid> tcf: I think it's just set the CVSROOT to /cvs/docs
<elliss> quaid: you seem to be implying more than one person per doc...
<quaid> megacoder: unclear, that is a role that needs to be defined and
<quaid> elliss: just preparing for it, that's all
<elliss> OK
<mrj> quaid: y not give the latter editor a different name, for clarity:
e.g. editorial director, manager, ...
<quaid> sure
<elliss> Perhaps say maintainer
<quaid> publisher
<quaid> ?
<quaid> or is that the Web person?
<mrj> anything that does the job...
<megacoder> "producer"
<tcf> quaid: ah, fedora-docs, just like before
<quaid> tcf: yeah, we probably want to move all that up one level,
perhaps ... or not ... open for discussion.
<quaid> elliss: as you said, FDSCo are all empowered to be the Producer,
but we probably want to split up the roles a bit to make it easier for
<tcf> quaid: right, I have some thoughts on that, but I don't want to
get off-topic
<quaid> elliss: we would all be able to do the role in terms of
permissions, and can in an urgent situation.
<elliss> Hmm.  I think I'm confused
<quaid> tcf: can you send them to the list?  I'm very interested in
discussing this.
<tcf> quaid: sure, np
<elliss> We have x "contributors" to a doc
<elliss> 1 editor per doc
<elliss> then ?
<quaid> elliss: sorry, I was referring to your asking if the overall
producer == FDSCo
<quaid> there could be a technical and a wordsmith editor who are not
the same
<tcf> I'm a bit confused too? why do we have 2 editors?
<tcf> ah, ok
<tcf> the question is that really realistic
<tcf> in an ideal world, that is great
<quaid> again, there isn't a requirement they be separate
<tcf> in reality, we might not have enough people for that right now
<stickster> Writer [+ Technical Reviewer] <--> Editor --> DocManager
<G2> tcf: yes
<stickster> tcf: Am I on target?
<tcf> stickster: that's what I was thinking
<megacoder> Editor <--> DocManager?
<stickster> Sorry about introducing a new term... I think "DocManager"
sounds better than "producer," which seems to indicate more production
<elliss> Perhaps have 1 overall DocBook lawyer/tech lead ? 
<G2> How much of a doc change is needed to kick this method in?
<stickster> megacoder: Sure, that could be a feedback cycle
<megacoder> I'm not sure that the "-->" stuff represents.
<tcf> where the editor edits for grammar, organization, etc. and the
docmanager edits to make sure it complies to cvs and build standards and
posts the document
<quaid> yes to what tcf just said
<elliss> tcf: GNOME-docs may do this
<quaid> with the caveat that the editor is a role filled by multiple
people, right?
<stickster> elliss: Does that create a problem  in that as tech lead
that person may need to know too much
<stickster> ?
<G2> I think Extras is done like this
<quaid> and the docmanager is a role filled by FDSCo people.
<stickster> quaid: editor should probably be [Editor [Editor...]]
<megacoder> At least for now.
<stickster> quaid: re: DocManager, right
<quaid> we are discussing two topics that are not exclusive, but I think
we can close up on one of them.
<G2> yes
<quaid> stickster: do you have enough to write up a prelim. FDP CVS
<stickster> quaid: I believe so. Does anyone have a problem with me
going right to the Wiki and inviting comment from there?
<quaid> not I
<elliss> Go for it
<megacoder> Fer sure
<G2> no, e-mail the list too.
<stickster> Right, I'll email when there's something there worth
<quaid> we should feel free to draft work via the Wiki, and it's
definitely a better idea to discuss it on list where it's archived.
<G2> How many do we have on the docs list?
<G2> agreed
<quaid> us plus a few more, gregdek, Sopwith, Rahul ...
<elliss> 500+
<stickster> quaid: Exactly what I was thinking... spooooky
<G2> elliss: on the e-mail list? Whoa.
<elliss> Yes
<quaid> oh, that list?
<stickster> We're talking f-docs-l and not f-dsco-l, right?
* stickster is glad he's not dyslexic
<G2> elliss: let;s get them to write something. Lazy, lazy...
<elliss> G2: It was on Fedora Update.  I nearly fell off my chair...
<G2> I know. Why are we struggling then?
<elliss> That's a serious question
<stickster> I think no one has got the hint that *we will help with
<quaid> just motivation, people like to go where there is a wake
<elliss> +1
<quaid> yes, that's true
<G2> What was the latest on Docbook wiki?
<stickster> quaid: The One True CVS opening, I think, will be a big
boost felt over the next 3-6 mos
<tcf> plus, we just now have CVS access
<elliss> Perception, too, I think
<tcf> I think that will help a lot!
<elliss> Emacs = hard and all that
<G2> What about DaveP, he write alot. He's been quiet
<megacoder> Well, I don't have CVS access yet...
<tcf> at the beginning, we had lots of volunteers, but once we said no
CVS right now, people didn't send any content
<quaid> G2: don't you remember when he quit the list?
<G2> quaid: nope.
<stickster> Is DaveP still lurking? I thought he got upset at some
point, but I can't remember exactly what about
<quaid> G2: I'll dig up the thread for you later ...
<G2> k
<quaid> I told him we would only use a free toolchain
<stickster> quaid: Ah, right
<G2> I know it look bad, but what abou POD?
<stickster> Are we still on the agenda here?
<G2> quaid: are
<megacoder> Could there be a public CVS arena that folks can use just to
compose their work and then toss it over the fence to the FDSCO
<G2> ah
<megacoder> Would that help with the public participation perception?
<G2> maybe
<elliss> megacoder: That's why I hoped for a wiki
<quaid> the wiki with cvs would rock
<stickster> megacoder: We are trying to discourage "toss it over the
fence," though... participation means more than that imho
<megacoder> Yes, but CVS access seems to be a bit of a Grail.
<G2> yes, people have to "care" what they write about
<stickster> Maybe the Wiki improves that by allowing people to saunter
by and improve stuff
<stickster> Hmm... badly composed sentence, sorry
<elliss> There ought to be training facilities of some kind...
<elliss> We have a very steep learning curve
<elliss> for the current toolchain
<stickster> elliss: I'm not sure I agree... I was Emacs *and* DocBook
ignorant before I got here
<elliss> Sure, it's perceeption
<megacoder> The learning curve should be moot after a few real small
docs get published there.
<megacoder> Composing docbook by example isn't that complicated.
<stickster> elliss: But, the Documentation Guide can be revisited now...
tcf has probably not had scads of time to work on it, but there are more
willing and able bodies now
<G2> I know you will hate this, but what about people that use Fedora at
home, what to write, but use Windows at work, and find time to write at
work? What do they use?
<stickster> I meant, more in number, not "more willing"
<megacoder> But reading that darned spec can be intimidation for the
casual helper.
<elliss> megacoder: +1
<quaid> G2:  ... write in docbook or plain text?
<megacoder> ?
<elliss> Plain-text would help a lot
<G2> quaid: true.
<elliss> Emacs is probably the worst perceived hurdle
<G2> I asked about POD. That's not hard at all. There are tools to turn
to xml etc.
<quaid> we had lots of discussion early on about getting the toolchain
to work under Windows
<stickster> elliss: No one has ever turned down plain-text as far as I
know... we've had many people volunteer to tag into DB/XML
<quaid> G2: what is POD?
<elliss> stickster: The Doc Guide implies Emacs is best
<elliss> I noticed one experienced documenter walk because of that
<megacoder> PLease let's don't go there.
<stickster> elliss: Sure, because it is! :-)  But seriously, we should
add a section in the Docs Guide to make it clear people can participate
without that
<stickster> I think we're finding areas of improvement for the
Documentation Guide, not failings on the broader scope of how to run the
<G2> http://search.cpan.org/~nandu/Pod-DocBook-1.2/lib/Pod/DocBook.pm
<tcf> stickster: good point, we added a section on using vi, but making
a huge note that it is not required to start participating is a good
<stickster> Let's try and hash that out on the f-DOCS-l (as opposed to
<quaid> agreed
<elliss> OK.
<quaid> there is one CVS question open, just want to be sure that
stickster feels he has enough to work with.
<quaid> * process of becoming a committer
<stickster> Can you repost?
<stickster> the question, that is
<stickster> Right
<quaid> do we want there to be _any_ barrier of entry?  other than
coming to the party prepared.
<elliss> As few as possible IMHO
<quaid> I think we should open the doors as much as we can, and only
close them back down if we have problems because of that.
<quaid> BUT
<stickster> I think it only starts with acl'ing a brand-new contributor
into an area for their own doc, only enough to make sure they're
comfortable, then we open up
<megacoder> Are there Wiki committers and CVS committers?
<quaid> we have to be diligent, or we'll end up with lots of dead trees,
<stickster> quaid: Exactly
<elliss> We do need to mentor new people as best we can IMHO
<quaid> megacoder: wiki is a bigger commit pool
<stickster> The first qualifier is -- write to the list, explain your
<quaid> process docs note:  we need to include mentoring new people
<megacoder> OK, the process I am seeing is to Wiki up a document and
then get the CVS folk to commit it?
<stickster> Second qualifier is -- write a draft, submit to an editor
(*mentoring here, as well as Step 1!*)
<G2> Yes, they need to have a doc first
<quaid> heh, ok
<stickster> Third is, after next draft you've proved you do want to
*work* on it, so you get a CVS folder
<elliss> Suggestion: perhaps draft explicitly can be plain-text ?
<G2> stickster: prove? how?
<megacoder> Ah, you get a CVS tree the old fashoined way..you _earn_ it.
<quaid> let's take this discussion to the list, in commentary to
stickster's prelim draft?
<G2> ok
<elliss> OK.
<stickster> G2: You've done steps 1-3, that's all... you've shown you
want to write, you've got an editor, you're almost to publication in
<quaid> moving on to active tasks ...
<stickster> K
<G2> k
<quaid> this is a hard thing to do here, I think, but ...
<quaid> howa bout this
<quaid> does anyone feel qualified/interested/crazy enough to take a
first stab at a master task list, prioritized?
<elliss> One clarification:
<elliss> Will this include specific docs, or are we just discussing
project structure
<quaid> that's open for discussion
<G2> 1. Active documents, 2. Gather list of authors interested in
writing. 3.....
<stickster> I think we should include planning upgrades to the
Documentation Guide in there, unless covered by #1
<megacoder> 4. Suggested topics.
<quaid> it should derive from our project scope, so it would include a
road map of documentation
<Sopwith> One quick request - please edit the wiki page for the extras
task list to add a link to the docs task list, and vice versa. Maybe
even maybe make an overall "Fedora Project Directory of Task Lists"
page :)
<quaid> noted!
<stickster> Good idea
<elliss> +1.  How does this relate to BZ tracking bug ?
<G2> What should be first? 
<stickster> That's a place to start to get the answer to #1, fer sure
<Sopwith> elliss: I guess you make a link to the BZ tracking bug as
well, then
<elliss> Sopwith: don't mind
<elliss> It's just the existing process
<quaid> elliss: that could be an easy way to include all the docs we are
working on.
<G2> How far are we with topics?
<elliss> I had a list
<quaid> but I think some docs are more core, such as the IG, and need to
be on our roadmap.
<stickster> We are covering #3 of 4
<stickster> G2: you meant on the agenda for today, right?
<quaid> maybe some core docs, references to groups "security", "file
servers", etc. and links to the appropriate bz.
<G2> yeah.
<elliss> I posted a short list of stuff following from the IG
<elliss> But it comes down to what people want to write...
<quaid> how about this, then, for master tasks:
<Sopwith> you guys are doing great - I apologize for having to leave
<-- Sopwith has quit ("Leaving")
<quaid> I'll draft up a first pass at the master tasks, trying to
balance these ideas of what should be there
<quaid> and we can add/tweak on-list
<elliss> OK
<G2> K
* stickster seconds
<quaid> sounds like my kind of deliverable, anyway :)
<stickster> Manage baby, manage!
<quaid> we actually touched on much of agenda item 4 already.
<quaid> 4. Status checks we might want:
<quaid>    * Process doc(s)
<quaid>      - FDSCo processes (Mark)
<quaid>      - FDP processes (i.e., what is embodied in Quick Start)
<quaid>      - How to assign writers and editors (unassigned)
<stickster> 4b - includes Doc Guide too I think
<quaid> mrj: I know you are working on it, so for here, do you have any
questions/requests of us in terms of the FDSCo process doc?
<stickster> Or at least, when it is amended to reduce entry barriers
<mrj> quaid: no questions yet. i'll post a draft & follow the
<mrj> sound reasonable?
<quaid> stickster: can you ask on f-docs-l for comments on what needs to
be fixed in the doc guide?  other usability comments?  make them file
bugs, of course ...
<quaid> mrj: sounds fine, thx
* stickster agrees and will take care of that
<quaid> ok, I'm due to update our own processes a bit.  This hinged on
my CVS working, which today it seems to be.
<quaid> I am doing a quick update of the f.r.c/projects/docs/ page and
will also review the QSG for updates.
<mrj> fwiw, we have some usability scripts we could run on the docs
guide. generates simple metrics...
<mrj> standard stuff
<stickster> Like rating the readability and such?
<mrj> yep, exactly
<elliss> That sounds cool
<stickster> sweet!
<mrj> i can post to our list
<stickster> If any of that is releaseable, it would be great to see it
in CVS
<mrj> yeah, it's all gpl'd
<stickster> under fedora-docs/scripts/ for example
<quaid> more than any other doc, that one needs to be i18nable
<quaid> mrj: do you have your CVS stuff done?  you could just check it
<stickster> The QSG?
<G2> what are the scripts for again?
<quaid> quick start guide
<quaid> that's the one that is supposed to NOT scare people.
<mrj> quaid: what cvs stuff?
<stickster> Sorry, I meant, "is the QSG what should be most i18n-able?"
<quaid> G2: readability on the Doc Guide
<quaid> stickster: no the Doc Guide
<stickster> quaid: ok, thanks
<quaid> mrj: cvs.fedora.redhat.com
<mrj> i meet with the i18n people later this month, we should generate
some questions for them
<stickster> G2: Another good thing is that, if these scripts end up in
CVS, editors can use them to check their revisions to make sure they're
actually *helping* the doc! :-)
<mrj> i18n people = red hat translation grou[
<G2> Cool.
<mrj> s/[/p
<quaid> mrj: I finaly (I think) replied about some stuff to them
<G2> I need to head off.
<quaid> yep
<quaid> we're tied up
<quaid> done
<quaid> basically
* quaid looks at agenda
<mrj> quaid; yeah, saw the messages. been doing some private messages...
<quaid> ah
<stickster> 60 min = a good, productive meeting!
<stickster> Nice work everyone!
<megacoder> Over and out
<quaid> anyone want to maintain the editors:writers list?  via wiki
<tcf> good meeting everyone
* quaid will carry the remaining questions to the list
<stickster> quaid: I nominate one of our Brit bunch
<quaid> ok
<quaid> </meeting>
<quaid> I'll post the notes to the list
* G2 is away: Off to learn
<stickster> Ha, G2 is bailing, that means stick elliss with the
writers:editors list
<elliss> I was going to
<stickster> Good man!
<quaid> elliss: really? sweet
<elliss> Has to be done...
<stickster> Shouldn't be too bad if we keep all parts of the Wiki
basically updated... do it as you go == easy
<stickster> Weekly FDSCo meetings will help keep it on track
<elliss> quaid: if you set the page the way you want it
<stickster> We ROCK!!!
<stickster> heh
<elliss> I can fill in without breaking anything :)
<quaid> ok
<elliss> Cheers !
<stickster> Who's writing up the list of master tasks again?
<quaid> cheers
<quaid> me
<stickster> If it fits there, can you put a WikiWord up for the
DocumentationGuide, and we'll put a TODO list of improvements in there
for people to comment on

## 30 ##
Karsten Wade, RHCE * Sr. Tech Writer * http://people.redhat.com/kwade/
gpg fingerprint:  2680 DBFD D968 3141 0115    5F1B D992 0E06 AD0E 0C41   
                       Red Hat SELinux Guide

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]