Home / Browse / OpenNMS / Mail / Archive

Donate

OpenNMS

Email Archive: opennms-docs (read-only)

2007:	_Jan	_Feb	_Mar (7)	_Apr (1)	_May	_Jun	_Jul	_Aug	_Sep (10)	_Oct	_Nov	_Dec
2008:	_Jan (1)	_Feb	_Mar	_Apr	_May	_Jun	_Jul	_Aug	_Sep	_Oct	_Nov	_Dec (3)
2009:	_Jan	_Feb	_Mar	_Apr	_May	_Jun	_Jul	_Aug	_Sep	_Oct (1)	_Nov	_Dec
2010:	_Jan	_Feb	_Mar	_Apr	_May (1)	_Jun	_Jul (6)	_Aug (8)	_Sep (2)	_Oct (1)	_Nov	_Dec
2011:	_Jan	_Feb	_Mar	_Apr	_May	_Jun	_Jul	_Aug (5)	_Sep	_Oct	_Nov	_Dec
2012:	_Jan	_Feb	_Mar	_Apr	_May	_Jun (4)	_Jul	_Aug (3)	_Sep (2)	_Oct	_Nov	_Dec
2013:	_Jan	_Feb	_Mar (3)	_Apr	_May	_Jun	_Jul	_Aug	_Sep	_Oct	_Nov	_Dec

[opennms-docs] docbook

From: Jonathan Sartin <jonathan@op...> - 2007-03-16 07:41

So, lets start with a poll.

Do we think the current docbook format "official" docs are a good way  
of distributing stuff.

I personally think yes, and that "offical" documentation makes sense  
living in SVN as docbook, with contributed stuff, faq and work in  
progress in the wiki.

I am a little worried about the complexity of the tool chain needed  
though. I'd love to be able to do everything in textmate or similar.

What do the rest of us think?

Cheers .... J

Re: [opennms-docs] docbook

From: Tarus Balog <tarus@op...> - 2007-03-16 14:11

On Mar 16, 2007, at 3:41 AM, Jonathan Sartin wrote:

> I am a little worried about the complexity of the tool chain needed
> though. I'd love to be able to do everything in textmate or similar.

Making the docs is pretty much magic to me at the moment, but using  
XMLMind as a WYSIWYG editor is very easy (if only they had an in-line  
spell checker I'd love it).

-T

_______________________________________________________________________
Tarus Balog, OpenNMS Maintainer             Main:   +1 919 533 0160
The OpenNMS Group, Inc.                     Fax:    +1 503 961 7746
Skype: tarusb                               Direct: +1 919 647 4749
Email: tarus@...                    URL: http://www.opennms.org
PGP Key Fingerprint: 8945 8521 9771 FEC9 5481  512B FECA 11D2 FD82 B45C

Re: [opennms-docs] docbook

From: Miskell, Craig <Craig.Miskell@ag...> - 2007-03-17 07:38

> Do we think the current docbook format "official" docs are a=20
> good way =20
> of distributing stuff.
>=20
> I personally think yes, and that "offical" documentation makes sense =20
> living in SVN as docbook, with contributed stuff, faq and work in =20
> progress in the wiki.
>=20
> I am a little worried about the complexity of the tool chain needed =20
> though. I'd love to be able to do everything in textmate or similar.
>=20
> What do the rest of us think?
I also like the idea of "official" documentation being somewhere safe
and untouchable by the great wide world - we're under a certain
obligation (in as much as any Open Source project is) to make sure our
documentation is as correct as possible.  It's as important as being
sure our code is as correct as possible.

That said, I enjoy using the wiki to work on it - formatting is a
breeze, I can concentrate on content, and it's available immediately for
anyone to see and use (especially important for work in progress). =20

So, probably something in SVN which is updated for a release, but which
is populated (manually, with some level of verification) from wiki
content.  IN fact, large portion of it can/should be copied/pasted
directly from the Wiki. =20

My "New_documentation" page is kinda heading towards a book type format
(intro, expand, expand again, conclude), which I'd be keen to see
becoming our "official" documentation. Does anyone know if there is some
easy way to suck stuff out of the wiki  into some other format which can
then be turned into a PDF/HTML/Format du jour?

Craig
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
Attention: The information contained in this message and/or attachments
from AgResearch Limited is intended only for the persons or entities
to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged
material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or
taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or
entities other than the intended recipients is prohibited by AgResearch
Limited. If you have received this message in error, please notify the
sender immediately.
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D

Re: [opennms-docs] docbook

From: Johan Edstrom <joed@op...> - 2007-03-17 12:43

Attachments: Message as HTML

+1 on the official - I think that is what people initially look for.
A Wiki may I think to many seem as work in progress.

On 3/17/07, Miskell, Craig <Craig.Miskell@...> wrote:
>
>
> > Do we think the current docbook format "official" docs are a
> > good way
> > of distributing stuff.
> >
> > I personally think yes, and that "offical" documentation makes sense
> > living in SVN as docbook, with contributed stuff, faq and work in
> > progress in the wiki.
> >
> > I am a little worried about the complexity of the tool chain needed
> > though. I'd love to be able to do everything in textmate or similar.
> >
> > What do the rest of us think?
> I also like the idea of "official" documentation being somewhere safe
> and untouchable by the great wide world - we're under a certain
> obligation (in as much as any Open Source project is) to make sure our
> documentation is as correct as possible.  It's as important as being
> sure our code is as correct as possible.
>
> That said, I enjoy using the wiki to work on it - formatting is a
> breeze, I can concentrate on content, and it's available immediately for
> anyone to see and use (especially important for work in progress).
>
> So, probably something in SVN which is updated for a release, but which
> is populated (manually, with some level of verification) from wiki
> content.  IN fact, large portion of it can/should be copied/pasted
> directly from the Wiki.
>
> My "New_documentation" page is kinda heading towards a book type format
> (intro, expand, expand again, conclude), which I'd be keen to see
> becoming our "official" documentation. Does anyone know if there is some
> easy way to suck stuff out of the wiki  into some other format which can
> then be turned into a PDF/HTML/Format du jour?
>
> Craig
> =======================================================================
> Attention: The information contained in this message and/or attachments
> from AgResearch Limited is intended only for the persons or entities
> to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged
> material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or
> taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or
> entities other than the intended recipients is prohibited by AgResearch
> Limited. If you have received this message in error, please notify the
> sender immediately.
> =======================================================================
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
> Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share
> your
> opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash
> http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
> _______________________________________________
> opennms-docs mailing list
> opennms-docs@...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opennms-docs
>

Re: [opennms-docs] docbook

From: Johan Edstrom <joed@op...> - 2007-03-17 21:41

Attachments: Message as HTML

http://www.opennms.org/index.php/Special:Export/Main_Page

Might actually be  useful.

On 3/17/07, Johan Edstrom <joed@...> wrote:
>
> +1 on the official - I think that is what people initially look for.
> A Wiki may I think to many seem as work in progress.
>
> On 3/17/07, Miskell, Craig < Craig.Miskell@...> wrote:
> >
> >
> > > Do we think the current docbook format "official" docs are a
> > > good way
> > > of distributing stuff.
> > >
> > > I personally think yes, and that "offical" documentation makes sense
> > > living in SVN as docbook, with contributed stuff, faq and work in
> > > progress in the wiki.
> > >
> > > I am a little worried about the complexity of the tool chain needed
> > > though. I'd love to be able to do everything in textmate or similar.
> > >
> > > What do the rest of us think?
> > I also like the idea of "official" documentation being somewhere safe
> > and untouchable by the great wide world - we're under a certain
> > obligation (in as much as any Open Source project is) to make sure our
> > documentation is as correct as possible.  It's as important as being
> > sure our code is as correct as possible.
> >
> > That said, I enjoy using the wiki to work on it - formatting is a
> > breeze, I can concentrate on content, and it's available immediately for
> >
> > anyone to see and use (especially important for work in progress).
> >
> > So, probably something in SVN which is updated for a release, but which
> > is populated (manually, with some level of verification) from wiki
> > content.  IN fact, large portion of it can/should be copied/pasted
> > directly from the Wiki.
> >
> > My "New_documentation" page is kinda heading towards a book type format
> > (intro, expand, expand again, conclude), which I'd be keen to see
> > becoming our "official" documentation. Does anyone know if there is some
> > easy way to suck stuff out of the wiki  into some other format which can
> > then be turned into a PDF/HTML/Format du jour?
> >
> > Craig
> > =======================================================================
> > Attention: The information contained in this message and/or attachments
> > from AgResearch Limited is intended only for the persons or entities
> > to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged
> > material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or
> > taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or
> > entities other than the intended recipients is prohibited by AgResearch
> > Limited. If you have received this message in error, please notify the
> > sender immediately.
> > =======================================================================
> >
> >
> > -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
> > Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share
> > your
> > opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash
> > http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > opennms-docs mailing list
> > opennms-docs@...
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opennms-docs
> >
>
>

Re: [opennms-docs] docbook

From: Miskell, Craig <Craig.Miskell@ag...> - 2007-03-18 20:29

=20

> -----Original Message-----
> From: opennms-docs-bounces@...
> [mailto:opennms-docs-bounces@...] On Behalf=20
> Of Johan Edstrom
> Sent: Sunday, 18 March 2007 9:41 a.m.
> To: opennms-docs@...
> Subject: Re: [opennms-docs] docbook
>=20
> http://www.opennms.org/index.php/Special:Export/Main_Page
>=20
> Might actually be  useful.
Ooo, shiny.  I can take that, shove it through some xslt (it's been a
few years since I did any of that, but I'm sure I can remember how if I
try) to convert to docbook, and we're away laughing. =20

Thanks for finding that Joed.

C
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
Attention: The information contained in this message and/or attachments
from AgResearch Limited is intended only for the persons or entities
to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged
material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or
taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or
entities other than the intended recipients is prohibited by AgResearch
Limited. If you have received this message in error, please notify the
sender immediately.
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D

Re: [opennms-docs] docbook

From: DJ Gregor <dj@op...> - 2007-04-29 18:20

On Fri, 16 Mar 2007 10:11:47 -0400, "Tarus Balog" <tarus@...>
said:
> On Mar 16, 2007, at 3:41 AM, Jonathan Sartin wrote:
> > I am a little worried about the complexity of the tool chain needed
> > though. I'd love to be able to do everything in textmate or similar.
> 
> Making the docs is pretty much magic to me at the moment, ...

cd opennms-doc
../build.sh compile
ls target/docbkx/html

> ... but using  
> XMLMind as a WYSIWYG editor is very easy (if only they had an in-line  
> spell checker I'd love it).

I agree.  i love XMLMind.


        - djg