Re: [Plone-docs] Tutorial Review

[Raphael R. <r....@bi...>]

Jon Stahl wrote:

[..]

Hi Jon and others,

> My opinion:
> 
> +1 for a how-to rather than a tutorial.  (Unfortunately, the only way to 
> change content types is manual cut-and-paste.)
> 

As a How-To I have no objections.

When I said in my previous post that I'm fine with this being
a tutorial this was based on the way it is organized and written.

But then for a tutorial I assume people have the expectation
that things outlined there do follow best practices. And this
applies to the code in particular IMHO.
Therefore my objections.

As the latter doesn't necessarily apply to a How-To I'm fine
with publishing it as such and I might comment on it later on
the site myself.

> -1 for not publishing because of Raphael's technical concerns.  Better 
> to publish a first draft, and let people (like Raphael!) give feedback, 
> then hopefully Nathan will be able to revise and improve it as 
> appropriate. 
> 

s.o.

> FYI, "submitting" a document for review puts it in the "review list" on 
> plone.org. 

Which I see nowhere (and I have management rights on the doc section).

> If you're on the doc-team, you should have access to that 
> via RSS and when logged in

While that's correct the RSS feed doesn't show whether something
is pending or published.

> (no email notifications yet, but that will be 
> possible after we migrate to plone 3!).  Notifying the docs list of 
> course isn't a bad idea, either.
> 

As I see it it's currently the best way to notify the doc team.

Sorry Nathan that we start discussing plone.org issues here.
Obviously this part has nothing to do with your submission
which is highly appreciated.

Raphael


> best,
> jon
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
> It's the best place to buy or sell services for
> just about anything Open Source.
> http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace