[CentOS-docs] Regarding GSoC project

Sun May 31 04:26:52 UTC 2015
Lei Yang <yltt1234512 at gmail.com>

>> Hi,
>> Over the last week, Lei and I have been researching about the review
>> platform where the content submitted can be reviewed, commented, tagged and
>> pushed. This will be an alternative to github pull requests interface, which
>> will thus reduce our dependency on Github in case Github changes its API
>> anytime in future.
>> Even firefox is considering using Github as an alternative medium to receive
>> contribution.
>> http://gregoryszorc.com/blog/2015/01/12/utilizing-github-for-firefox-development/
>> Lei made a great chart comparing the platforms.
>> https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9sUy41_Rk3KdGl4RVhDSXZIZmc/view?usp=sharing
>> So overall Bugzilla looks a great option. But there is one major flaw, we
>> need to view the article submitted at each point(code review) which bugzilla
>> lacks.
>> The solution to this is creating a plugin for markdown previewing.
>> The typical workflow might look like this:
>> 1. Author writes content in markdown language.
>> 2. Makes a pull request on github.
>> 3. Corresponding to the pull request a issue is created on bugzilla.
>> 4. CentOS staff can either review the article on github pull request, or on
>> bugzilla.
>> 5. Comments are two way synced.
>> 6. At each point the article can be viewed on bugzilla, using an extension
>> we propose to make.
>> 7. After many iterations of commenting, and improving, article is finally
>> accepted.
>> 8. Staff tags it, and pushes to git.centos.org.
>> 9. Using git.centos.org, new website is generated and pushed.
>> There are many challenging tasks in this, especially the bugzilla issue
>> creation on pull request and two way comment sync. This has never been done
>> before, but we looked at the API and think we can make it work. Another
>> challenging task is markdown preview on bugzilla.
> As a word of warning here, not all Markdown parsers and renderers are
> the same. GitHub's makes a number of additions and changes that go
> against the original (admittedly vague) spec. This could mean your
> previews are different and may not match the documentation build. An
> alternative approach would be to build the docs in CI and link to the
> built version in a comment on both systems.

Thanks very much for your advice!

We are planning to use Bugzilla, which doesn’t have a built-in code preview function. So we will need to use an external place to provide article review. Building the article in a CI and attach the link on github and reviewing platform would be a great solution. And about markdown standard, it will be a problem to solve.
>> Please let us know, what you think about this?
>> Regards,
>> Kunaal
>> --
>> Regards,
>> Kunaal Jain
>> _______________________________________________
>> CentOS-docs mailing list
>> CentOS-docs at centos.org
>> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS-docs mailing list
> CentOS-docs at centos.org <mailto:CentOS-docs at centos.org>
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs <http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-docs/attachments/20150531/600354d3/attachment-0004.html>