Re: kb -> c.developermanual

On 8 Jul 2011, at 08:24, Dylan Jay <dylan-Q+/Sk2sTzaxWk0Htik3J/[email protected]> wrote:

> On 08/07/2011, at 5:15 PM, Martin Aspeli wrote:
> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 8 Jul 2011, at 02:02, Dylan Jay <dylan-Q+/Sk2sTzaxWk0Htik3J/[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> On 07/07/2011, at 11:39 AM, Alex Clark wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Hi.
>>>> 
>>>> On 6/19/11 7:36 AM, Dylan Jay wrote:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>> 
>>>>> There's lots of links in the collective developers manual to KB
>>>>> articles. Is there any reason not to just import those documents
>>>>> directly into the manual and remove the KB article?
>>>> 
>>>> Yes.
>>>> 
>>>> I'll state the obvious: because it may offend the KB article author. I
>>>> suspect you'd need to contact the author directly and ask where they'd
>>>> prefer their article to live.
>>> 
>>> seems a shame as where we really want to go is non-repeated
>>> documentation.
>>> but I guess you're right, not worth coming up with a process until we
>>> get manual publishing working.
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Note: we've still got a "mess" on our hands wrt to collective docs.
>>>> I am
>>>> hoping to clean up and automate the inclusion of c-docs in plone.org
>>>> as
>>>> soon as someone from the board replies to this ticket:
>>>> 
>>>> * https://dev.plone.org/plone/ticket/11771
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Right now we have:
>>>> 
>>>> * Out of date c-docs on plone.org/documentation (because no one
>>>> understands the upload process[1]). I'm now OK with fixing this
>>>> (i.e. I
>>>> know how to do it).
>>> 
>>> I'm happy to fix any coding issues with the funnelweb import. Last
>>> time I tried it was working.
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> * Out of date c-docs on collective-docs.plone.org because your recent
>>>> changes added a Sphinx module that does not exist on deus (includedocs
>>>> IIRC).
>>> 
>>> :) sorry about that. But will be worth it if all goes to plan and we
>>> can kick start core devs into documenting their own work.
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> As I am not terribly interested in fixing deus[2], I've recently
>>>> considered moving c-docs to github and publishing them to
>>>> readthedocs.org (which moo has +1'd). But I still need to test.
>>> 
>>> So replace collective-docs.plone.org with readthedocs? I think that's
>>> a good idea.
>> 
>> +1, though we should link back to plone.org/documentation for more docs.
> 
> +1 on linking back to plone.org/documentation.
> 
> BTW, Alex wasn't suggesting removing the manual from plone.org/documentation. Just that he prefers not to read it there.

I know. But having it on another plone.org subdomain is really confusing and sends the wrong message. Syndicating to readthedocs is a nice idea, and does not send such a mixed message.

Martin
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All of the data generated in your IT infrastructure is seriously valuable.
Why? It contains a definitive record of application performance, security 
threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes 
sense of it. IT sense. And common sense.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2d-c2