On Fri, 2004-07-30 at 09:12, Dave Pawson wrote:
On Fri, 2004-07-30 at 07:34, Karsten Wade wrote:
> Sorry if I'm being dense, but I don't understand how having public CVS
> resolves the problems of Fedora docs?
One problem I see it addressing.
There is no (apparent) way to get documentation *to* Fedora without it?
Even a statement, drop it into this repository and it will be reviewed
in two weeks, would be a help.
I.e. why should I write if there is no way to get stuff into Fedora?
That's the issue being addressed... or more accurately, not being
addressed, despite promises some time ago.
You are, how do you say?, "spot on." Can't argue with the facts,
although I'm trying to figure out how I, at least, can be a conduit to
get documentation into Fedora. Still, that's not a scalable model, eh?
My concern right now, though, is this: what if open CVS access were done
tomorrow? How ready are we for it?
1. What is our process to decide who gets write access to fedora-docs?
2. What should be in there _right_now_ that is not?
3. What bugs are there to fix in the existing documentation, so
contributors can start working on them?
4. What should be on the fedora.redhat.com/docs
4.1 How are we going to manage multiple documents across multiple
versions? The left hand navigation bar is going to fill up pretty
quickly at this rate.
As for 1, I haven't the foggiest idea what Cristian's process is going
to be. We should at least discuss it, though. The other items are
something we can do something about.
Karsten Wade, RHCE, Tech Writer
this .signature subject to random changes
gpg fingerprint: 2680 DBFD D968 3141 0115 5F1B D992 0E06 AD0E 0C41