Re: kb -> c.developermanual

On 7/8/11 6:50 PM, Dylan Jay wrote:
> On 09/07/2011, at 12:25 AM, Alex Clark<[email protected]>  wrote:
>
>> 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 * Out of date c-docs on plone.org/documentation (because no one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 * Out of date c-docs on collective-docs.plone.org because your recent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.
>
> Redir to readthedocs since people expect a sphinx layout.

Done.


>
> But I would like to fix the issue of many many names for that manual.
> Can we just merge the two plone developers manuals and call it that?


This is what I was hoping Martin or someone would provide feedback for 
here. "Collective docs" sounds right to me. And the URL is reasonable. 
If we're going to make a change, I'm not sure what that change should be 
(amongst all the options I listed yesterday).


>
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> 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
>> _______________________________________________
>> Plone-docs mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/plone-docs
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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