CVS problem
Karsten Wade
kwade at redhat.com
Wed Jun 8 20:56:15 UTC 2005
On Wed, 2005-06-08 at 12:03 -0500, Tommy Reynolds wrote:
> Possible solutions are:
>
> A) Document, document, document the proper (nonstandard)
> procedure for importing a document and ask newbies to follow
> it unerringly; or
>
> B) Provide a shell script that will do the cleanup and importing
> for them and ask that they use the script instead of doing the
> CVS import themselves. We'll still have to clean up the
> mess when they ignore the script and try to learn about CVS
> by doing the import manually; or
>
> C) Write a PGP(?) / Wiki(?) / HTML(?) / Java(?) page that will do
> the selective importing if the newbie just identifies the
> top-level directory in a form. Very similar to attaching a
> file to a Yahoo mail message. or
>
> D) Keep the "docs-common" as a peer directory that needs be
> updated only when the CVS structure changes or when a document
> fails to build because of a missing entity.
Ah, I see.
Having docs-common as a peer directory seems to be the least
mainentance, hassle, and chance of breaking in a bad way.
We can easily have a list of common errors in the Documentation Guide
that mean you need to look for an update to docs-common.
Options A, B, and C require too much for the value they bring.
Option D only risks minor problems for the user that teaches them better
how to fish when it happens.
> My point is the current setup has a painless, no-error-possible
> document import. I don't really care if a stylesheet changes an
> indent from 0.5in to 0.56in because the document rendering on the
> local system isn't critical. Anyone wanting "proper" documents can
> just update the "docs-common" before sending the PDF to the printers.
I agree with this except that the current setup does need a tweak, which
is why we have this thread. Elliott pointed out the messiness of all
the little directories that docs-setup brings down, and he was echoing
something that I thought. Already we have four directories that need to
be brought down to peer level and updated separately.
Reading between the lines in your post, I *think* you agree with this
reason for moving everything into a single module, docs-common.
- Karsten
--
Karsten Wade, RHCE * Sr. Tech Writer * http://people.redhat.com/kwade/
gpg fingerprint: 2680 DBFD D968 3141 0115 5F1B D992 0E06 AD0E 0C41
Red Hat SELinux Guide
http://www.redhat.com/docs/manuals/enterprise/RHEL-4-Manual/selinux-guide/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-docs-list/attachments/20050608/b28801f7/attachment.sig>
More information about the fedora-docs-list
mailing list