Hi again all,<br><br>I'm frankly excited to hear Sugar Labs' enthusiasm about doc. It really has taken a community effort and knowing that doc could see some synergy with def effort is great. <br><br>I have ideas for getting more energy behind some of the separate doc deliverables we could target, and have already sent out a couple of emails, especially in pursuit of a Turtle Art "manual" that a Houstonite put together, and I think she'd be willing to post it on FM. <br>
<br>So, an approach would be similar to what we've done before - when we have a well-defined task analysis and outline for a manual, we start recruiting writers for it. If writers volunteer, we can have specifics for them to work on.<br>
<br>As for tracking doc bugs and requests, I'd love to have doc requests prioritized just like software bug are prioritized. That approach would let us figure out how to "staff" the different projects and also would work well towards a Book Sprint. Adam, I have a writer her in Austin who was just asking about that on her blog, and maybe we could get her and one other interested person to write for a burst of time if we have a prioritized set of docs to work on.<br>
<br>Um, let's see, does that cover the spirit of the questions and approach? I hope I'm not missing anything or misrepresenting a typical approach. <br><br>I'd be happy to coordinate with volunteer writers you send my way - I already have templatized email responses from OLPC work that I can revise for those who want to volunteer for OLPC/Sugar docs on FM.<br>
<br>Thanks,<br>Anne Gentle<br><a href="mailto:e%3Aannegentle@gmail.com">e:annegentle@gmail.com</a><br>b:<a href="http://www.justwriteclick.com">www.justwriteclick.com</a><br><br>
Message: 1<br>
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2008 19:11:53 -0500<br>
From: David Farning <<a href="mailto:dfarning@sugarlabs.org" target="_blank">dfarning@sugarlabs.org</a>><br>
Subject: [FM Discuss] FM upstream to Sugar Labs<br>
To: <a href="mailto:discuss@lists.flossmanuals.net" target="_blank">discuss@lists.flossmanuals.net</a><br>
Message-ID: <<a href="mailto:1214352713.32315.91.camel@dfarning.desktop.org" target="_blank">1214352713.32315.91.camel@dfarning.desktop.org</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8<br>
<br>
I spent a good part of today thinking about how FM and SL could<br>
collaborate in a way that was beneficial to both of us.<br>
<br>
I keep coming back to the upstream/downstream relationship between<br>
software packages. When I write a program in c, I don't rewrite the<br>
compiler. I use gcc. It makes no sense spending the time required to<br>
learn compiler theory and hack away on my own. The gcc project has<br>
already assembled the expertise and processes to do a better job than I<br>
ever could.<br>
<br>
I am thinking about using FM documentation in the same manner. Sugar<br>
Labs has nowhere near the time or manpower to create documentation as<br>
effectively as FM.<br>
<br>
I hope that I did not appear as if I had a laundry list of things I<br>
would like FM to do for me. Rather, ?I would like to:<br>
<br>
1. Ask your permission to use your documentation as our primary user<br>
documentation.<br>
<br>
2. Request that we work together to create the 'canonical' Sugar and<br>
Activities documentation.<br>
<br>
3. Express that we are not expecting you to write our manual. Instead,<br>
we are using your manual about our product.<br>
<br>
In return we will:<br>
<br>
1. Always keep the documentation open.<br>
<br>
2. Send patches back upstream if we find bugs or ways to improve the<br>
manual. (Sending patches and finding bugs is not the right terminology,<br>
but you get the idea.)<br>
<br>
3. Direct potential documentation writers to you to help build your<br>
community.<br>
<br>
Thanks<br>
Dfarning<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 2<br>
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2008 03:32:59 +0200<br>
From: adam hyde <<a href="mailto:adam@flossmanuals.net" target="_blank">adam@flossmanuals.net</a>><br>
Subject: Re: [FM Discuss] FM upstream to Sugar Labs<br>
To: <a href="mailto:discuss@lists.flossmanuals.net" target="_blank">discuss@lists.flossmanuals.net</a><br>
Message-ID: <1214357579.7274.21.camel<div>@resetera><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"<br>
<br>
hi,<br>
<br>
<br>
><br>
> I am thinking about using FM documentation in the same manner. Sugar<br>
> Labs has nowhere near the time or manpower to create documentation as<br>
> effectively as FM.<br>
<br>
It sounds good to me, except you should note that FM is in some ways a<br>
collection of communities. The OLPC manual is headed up by Anne and<br>
several others have also worked on it. In this sense you could imagine<br>
FM to be a smaller friendlier version of source forge. There is a<br>
platform established for making manuals - but each manual must work out<br>
its own way of getting contributions. For this reason I think Anne is<br>
the FM touchstone on OLPC/Sugar manuals as she has already started this<br>
process.<br>
<br>
> 1. Ask your permission to use your documentation as our primary user<br>
> documentation.<br>
><br>
<br>
All docs are GPL. So you are free to do with them as you like. Thats<br>
actually the point but its very nice of you to ask :)<br>
<br>
> 2. Request that we work together to create the 'canonical' Sugar and<br>
> Activities documentation.<br>
<br>
sounds good to me. We should perhaps discuss how to bring others into<br>
the project. Some on the FM list maybe interested but there are also<br>
other strategies. Anne and I had considered applying for a small amount<br>
of money to have a Book Sprint on Sugar...I think this could be a very<br>
effective way of not just producing material but getting everyone<br>
heading in the same direction.<br>
<br>
><br>
> 3. Express that we are not expecting you to write our manual. Instead,<br>
> we are using your manual about our product.<br>
> In return we will:<br>
><br>
> 1. Always keep the documentation open.<br>
><br>
> 2. Send patches back upstream if we find bugs or ways to improve the<br>
> manual. (Sending patches and finding bugs is not the right terminology,<br>
> but you get the idea.)<br>
><br>
> 3. Direct potential documentation writers to you to help build your<br>
> community.<br>
<br>
<br>
I think its worth getting Annes thoughts on the above :)<br>
<br>
adam<br>
<br>
<br>
><br>
> Thanks<br>
> Dfarning<br>
><br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> Discuss mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:Discuss@lists.flossmanuals.net" target="_blank">Discuss@lists.flossmanuals.net</a><br>
> <a href="http://lists.flossmanuals.net/listinfo.cgi/discuss-flossmanuals.net" target="_blank">http://lists.flossmanuals.net/listinfo.cgi/discuss-flossmanuals.net</a><br>
--<br>
Adam Hyde<br>
FLOSS Manuals<br>
<br>
<a href="http://www.flossmanuals.net/" target="_blank">http://www.flossmanuals.net</a><br>
+ 31 6 2808 7108</div><br>