[FM Discuss] Versioning for entire collections

[Joshua Gay]

I'll be in California in two weeks at my new job, CK12.org.

-Josh

On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 6:07 PM, adam hyde <adam at flossmanuals.net> wrote:
> Luke, Seth, and Joshua...you are all in Boston right? I will be there in
> 2 weeks. Maybe we can have a coffee and discuss this idea further?
>
> adam
>
>
> On Fri, 2008-10-17 at 18:05 -0400, adam hyde wrote:
>> so how do we go about this?
>>
>> I can talk to Aco about creating a docbook exporter. Do we need to get
>> some heads together and plan how to take care of all the parts of the
>> puzzle?
>>
>> adam
>>
>>
>> On Fri, 2008-10-17 at 17:33 -0400, Luke Faraone wrote:
>> >
>> > On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 16:52, adam hyde <adam at flossmanuals.net>
>> > wrote:
>> >         A deb would be fantastic...were you thinking of doing it in
>> >         html or
>> >         using pdf? I was actually pondering the possibility of a
>> >         simple GTK
>> >         reader...too fancy? We could (for example) export to docbook
>> >         if we could
>> >         find a nice reading app...
>> >
>> >
>> > GNOME uses Yelp to read their manuals, I'm sure we could use that too
>> > if we'd rather. (Although I've been partial to Browsers, we can do
>> > both!)
>> >
>> > DocBook works the best, as it can be easilly converted from there to a
>> > multitude of formats.
>> >
>> > Here's my idea of the workflow:
>> >      1. Upstream (FLOSSManuals) provides export functionality (to
>> >         DocBook) and a generic make-me-a-manual script (pulls in the
>> >         latest DocBook, converts to whatever format, I can write this)
>> >      2. Downstream (Debian, Fedora, Ubuntu) works out the making it a
>> >         package (I'll do this for sugar + debian/ubuntu)
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 17:19, Seth Woodworth <seth at laptop.org> wrote:
>> >         Hrrm... I would be very interested in upstreaming a
>> >         sugar-manual package into Sugar-for-other-distro's.
>> >
>> >
>> > That's the idea. I'm hoping to be able to package
>> >
>> >
>> >         > *shrug*  have high numbers.  Or name a release by day/time.
>> >          Having *any*
>> >         > release info is better than none.
>> >         >
>> >         > Actually, I think that a timestamp wouldn't be awful, use
>> >         the exact moment
>> >         > that someone hits the publish button.  Easy.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >         I agree. I think that even without any info it would still be
>> >         good to
>> >         have a DEB package of all of the manuals. Once the process is
>> >         created,
>> >         it can help bring focus to upstream/QA type work/issues.
>> >
>> > I assume here that it'll be a separate DEB per manual... (or group)
>> >
>> >
>> > -lf (ffm)
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Discuss mailing list
>> > Discuss at lists.flossmanuals.net
>> > http://lists.flossmanuals.net/listinfo.cgi/discuss-flossmanuals.net
> --
> Adam Hyde
> Founder FLOSS Manuals
> http://www.flossmanuals.net
>
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at lists.flossmanuals.net
> http://lists.flossmanuals.net/listinfo.cgi/discuss-flossmanuals.net
>



-- 
<http://joshuagay.org>