[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: CVS problem

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

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]