[Bug 427481] Review Request: documentation-devel - Documentation tool chain

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: documentation-devel - Documentation tool chain


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=427481


kwade at redhat.com changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |kwade at redhat.com




------- Additional Comments From kwade at redhat.com  2008-01-14 15:08 EST -------
Lightweight reply while I'm adding myself to the Cc:; ignore if you wish. :)

(In reply to comment #55)
> I knew about the *-devel namespace thing, since I've been a Fedora user since
> 1.92, and I knew that this hurdle would come up. Of course, my opinion didn't
> carry much weight because it's an undocumented convention, and they were doing
> things by the book.
> 
> It's a good point that it isn't written down anywhere. Warren made some nice
> technical observations that could serve as a basis for making this into an
> explicit policy.

We started work on the Fedora Get Involved Guide (GIG) this week:

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Docs/Drafts/GetInvolvedGuide

... which is what Paul's (Frields) "Developer Guide" hackfest session turned in
to.  One shakeout from this should be finding similar holes and assumptions in
the packaging process, which comprises a majority of the GIG content.   I'm
certain the missing content about the *-devel convention is going to get fixed
now. :)

> I'd imagine that since this package already has a significant community around
> it once it gets included in Fedora we'll find a lot of those people more active
> in Fedora. Being "internal" to Red Hat doesn't make you any less of a community
> member. I was a Fedora user before I joined Red Hat, and I'll be one after I'm
gone.

Agreed; I didn't meant to imply anything else or to assign different values to
different communities.  It was an observation that explained the disconnection
up to this point.

> As far as the name for the package goes, when considering a package name, as
> seasoned hands know, the overriding consideration, beyond all technical
> concerns, and especially when you're talking community, is "how will it look on
> a t-shirt?"

Darn tootin'! 


-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.