From: Alex C. <ac...@ac...> - 2011-07-09 14:35:38
|
On 7/9/11 5:16 AM, Martin Aspeli wrote: > > > On 9 Jul 2011, at 02:14, Alex Clark<ac...@ac...> wrote: > >> On 7/8/11 6:50 PM, Dylan Jay wrote: >>> On 09/07/2011, at 12:25 AM, Alex Clark<ac...@ac...> wrote: >>> >>>> On 7/8/11 4:21 AM, Martin Aspeli wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 8 Jul 2011, at 08:24, Dylan Jay<dy...@dy...> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On 08/07/2011, at 5:15 PM, Martin Aspeli wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 8 Jul 2011, at 02:02, Dylan Jay<dy...@dy...> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 07/07/2011, at 11:39 AM, Alex Clark wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Hi. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On 6/19/11 7:36 AM, Dylan Jay wrote: >>>>>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> There's lots of links in the collective developers manual to KB >>>>>>>>>> articles. Is there any reason not to just import those documents >>>>>>>>>> directly into the manual and remove the KB article? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Yes. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I'll state the obvious: because it may offend the KB article author. I >>>>>>>>> suspect you'd need to contact the author directly and ask where they'd >>>>>>>>> prefer their article to live. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> seems a shame as where we really want to go is non-repeated >>>>>>>> documentation. >>>>>>>> but I guess you're right, not worth coming up with a process until we >>>>>>>> get manual publishing working. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Note: we've still got a "mess" on our hands wrt to collective docs. >>>>>>>>> I am >>>>>>>>> hoping to clean up and automate the inclusion of c-docs in plone.org >>>>>>>>> as >>>>>>>>> soon as someone from the board replies to this ticket: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> * https://dev.plone.org/plone/ticket/11771 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Right now we have: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> * Out of date c-docs on plone.org/documentation (because no one >>>>>>>>> understands the upload process[1]). I'm now OK with fixing this >>>>>>>>> (i.e. I >>>>>>>>> know how to do it). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I'm happy to fix any coding issues with the funnelweb import. Last >>>>>>>> time I tried it was working. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> * Out of date c-docs on collective-docs.plone.org because your recent >>>>>>>>> changes added a Sphinx module that does not exist on deus (includedocs >>>>>>>>> IIRC). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> :) sorry about that. But will be worth it if all goes to plan and we >>>>>>>> can kick start core devs into documenting their own work. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> As I am not terribly interested in fixing deus[2], I've recently >>>>>>>>> considered moving c-docs to github and publishing them to >>>>>>>>> readthedocs.org (which moo has +1'd). But I still need to test. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> So replace collective-docs.plone.org with readthedocs? I think that's >>>>>>>> a good idea. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> +1, though we should link back to plone.org/documentation for more docs. >>>>>> >>>>>> +1 on linking back to plone.org/documentation. >>>>>> >>>>>> BTW, Alex wasn't suggesting removing the manual from plone.org/documentation. Just that he prefers not to read it there. >>>>> >>>>> I know. But having it on another plone.org subdomain is really confusing and sends the wrong message. Syndicating to readthedocs is a nice idea, and does not send such a mixed message. >>>> >>>> >>>> +1. So to clarify collective-docs.plone.org should redir to >>>> plone.org/documentation… or leave it the way it is redir'ing to >>>> readthedocs.org. >>> >>> Redir to readthedocs since people expect a sphinx layout. >> >> Done. >> >> >>> >>> But I would like to fix the issue of many many names for that manual. >>> Can we just merge the two plone developers manuals and call it that? >> >> >> This is what I was hoping Martin or someone would provide feedback for >> here. "Collective docs" sounds right to me. And the URL is reasonable. >> If we're going to make a change, I'm not sure what that change should be >> (amongst all the options I listed yesterday). > > Collective Docs is not a good name. It's meaningless to anyone not a seasoned Plone developer. > > Plone Developer Manual is fine if we merge. If not, Plone Community-Contributed Development Documentation or similar may be fine. How about a compromise (for now). I've changed the title (see attached) but there is no easy way to delete projects on readthedocs (that I can see), so I don't want to create a 2nd project with a new url just yet (which may cause more confusion). If I can figure out how to change the URL, I don't mind doing that either. Alex > > Martin > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > All of the data generated in your IT infrastructure is seriously valuable. > Why? It contains a definitive record of application performance, security > threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes > sense of it. IT sense. And common sense. > http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2d-c2 > _______________________________________________ > Plone-docs mailing list > Plo...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/plone-docs -- Alex Clark · http://aclark.net |