[CentOS-docs] discussions around upstream documentation

The Fedora team is working on moving away from docbook and xml to
asciidoc. This is a more straightforward approach in the file, with a
reasonably easy syntax to learn. This will let us keep docs in git so
that users who find something and want to fix it can simply submit a
pull request or patch to update and someone responsible can approve or
deny it.

In the future, it means that non-wiki docs should be easily consumable
and editable. That doesn't help us for the current state of
documentation, but it does help to resolve things for the future. I'm
still working on the state of the existing docs via a few contacts I
made at the docs day.

On 05/17/2016 04:07 AM, Brian (bex) Exelbierd wrote:
> Jim,
> 
> What were the outcomes from a CentOS perspective?
> 
> thank you.
> 
> regards,
> 
> bex
> 
> On 04/11/2016 06:18 PM, Jim Perrin wrote:
>> There is a Fedora Activity Day
>> (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FAD_Documentation_2016 ) centered around
>> documentation, where I'm going to see what can be done about the state
>> of centos documentation from upstream sources.
>>
>> Most of the tooling for documentation for these two groups is centered
>> around git. For the most part, our documentation currently lives in the
>> wiki, and has a fairly high barrier to new contributors.
>>
>> Would the regulars who contribute on the wiki consider consider
>> supporting a migration to a git based documentation workflow?
>>
>> I think this would help lower the barrier to contribution by allowing
>> new contributors to submit a pull request or patch for documentation
>> rather than join a mailing list, request access, etc.
>>
>> What are the thoughts or concerns about this sort of workflow change?
>>
>>
>>
>>
> 

-- 
Jim Perrin
The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org
twitter: @BitIntegrity | GPG Key: FA09AD77