[CentOS-devel] Documentation SIG

Fri Jan 17 17:34:47 UTC 2014
Karsten Wade <kwade at redhat.com>

Hash: SHA1

On 01/17/2014 05:43 AM, Zachary Oglesby wrote:

> Having worked on Fedora Docs for many years I would like to make a 
> suggestion that the same model is followed, just in reverse.

You'll find me still opinionated on that one :) but generally I agree.

> Many Red Hat docs start as Fedora Documentation and are tweaked to
> fit RH products. CentOS can use the RH docs as a base and remove
> the unneeded content. While it will not provide everything CentOS
> needs for documentation a lot of good content has already been
> written as in licensed so that it can be reused (CC BY-SA 3.0).
> I may be making an incorrect assumption, but it is worth
> mentioning.

What we need are the doc SRPMs for all the guides. I think the
DocBook/Publican is a bit of a barrier to participation, but much less
than converting manually from the rendered HTML.

The challenge with the big guides is working with them is a different
discipline than drive-by submissions, and different than short how-to
articles on the wiki, etc.

The big guides discipline may take some building, where we can
probably find ways to get people successful right away working in
MarkDown or AsciiDoc and submitting pull requests, etc. Maybe a
two-pronged approach, short-term and longer-term?

- - Karsten
- -- 
Karsten 'quaid' Wade        .^\    CentOS Engineering Manager
http://TheOpenSourceWay.org    \  http://community.redhat.com
@quaid (identi.ca/twitter/IRC)  \v'             gpg: AD0E0C41
Version: GnuPG v1
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/