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

RE: Editing/QA for LDP docs.

Hash: SHA1

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tim []
> Sent: Sunday, December 05, 1999 7:58 PM
> To: ldp-discuss
> Subject: Re: Editing/QA for LDP docs.
> > Just the basics, like spelling, grammar, punctuation and 
> the like.  I
> > know that the Linuxdoc to text tools have a couple of 
> "glitches", and
> > it looks like there are some problems with HTML output as well. 
> > Is the CVS server just doing the SGML sources, or other  
> formats as well?
> How these will be handled needs to be addressed.  I'm not sure if
> beginning by asking the authors/maintainers permission to do this
> is appropriate or not, but if we're going to use CVS as its 
> intended we more or less need to agree that minor corrections can
> be done  w/out too much red tape.  

I would think that having minor corrections being possible by
whomever is a member of the "editors" group would be almost a
requirement.  It shouldn't be that hard to give access to a few
people who have volunteered to do editing so that they can commit
their changes back to the CVS repository.  

> The LDP CVS Repository will take all the sgml source  and create
> the desired formats.  Editing of each type of doc (eg. ascii, 
> html, tex, etc.) should not be done, as this would defeat the
> purpose somewhat.  

I'd thought of that, but since the tools don't quite work, and
because I can't even get the newer tools to compile on my machine... 

> > If it's hosting the other formats, we (those of us with 
> some free > time)
> > could volunteer to take a doc in both SGML and the other
> > formats and check the non-sgml versions for consistency, to 
> make sure
> > that the formatter has done a good job.  Of course, if the 
> only thing
> > that the CVS server is holding onto is the SGML sources, we can't
> > do that.  Comments? 
> There are documents now that are not properly formatted (at 
> least in the
> output) that could use some prying eyes.  Please feel free to 
> let myself
> or the author/maintainer know which ones they are..

right off, the BootDisk howto, but the author is the one who tipped
me off to this, because I was just looking at the HTML output and
trying to use the HOWTO, not to proof read it.  I keep meaning to
grab the SGML sources to that one, but I haven't gotten there yet. 
I'm not sure what can be done, if there is an error in the linuxdoc
to html tools, unless it can be worked around by writing the sgml
slightly differently.

> The whole issue of who can and cannot checkout and modify 
> documents does
> need to be addressed.  I'm working with Sergiusz Pawlowicz now on a
> FAQ/Manual/HOWTO for using the LDP CVS Repostitory now, but 
> these issues
> of editing need to be addressed now before the document can 
> be completed.
> I will tell you this.....if anyone will have the option of 
> checking out
> and correcting the document(s) in question they will *not* have the
> capability to have them processed and published.

This should be simple to work around.  You allow anybody to check
documents out, but only designated people to check them back in.  I
don't see that as a big problem myself, but I could be missing
something here.  

> Whether or not the author/maintainer and/or HOWTO Coordinator
> should reserve this right needs to be addressed and agreed upon.  
> The sooner the better.  

Once again, I think that we should allow some people who want to
volunteer to do this sort of thing write access to the CVS
repository, and allow anonymous read access.  Some script can go
through and look at the documents that have changed since the last
time it was run, and re-process those SGML sources into output for
distribution.  This could be done on a daily basis, or less often
depending on how many changes are getting made.  

Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.1 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>


To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to ldp-discuss-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org