Re: kb -> c.developermanual

On 7/8/11 4:21 AM, Martin Aspeli wrote:
>
>
> 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 * Out of date c-docs on plone.org/documentation (because no one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 * Out of date c-docs on collective-docs.plone.org because your recent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.


+1. So to clarify collective-docs.plone.org should redir to 
plone.org/documentation… or leave it the way it is redir'ing to 
readthedocs.org.




>
> 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


-- 
Alex Clark · http://aclark.net


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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