CMS choice - Zikula is the new Fedora CMS
by David Nalley
Now that I have your attention:
So we walked away from FUDcon with a couple of plans.
Plan A: was to put a call out and see if we could get a group of
people interested from a project willing to take on some of the
implementation
We had a number of other plans but let's forget them for a moment, but
we circulated a call to several lists - and we received essentially a
single response from Zikula
Moreover the offering appears to meet the requirements that we stated.
Which brings me to the question - why are we languishing when it comes
to making this decision? We even regressed and talked about if/why we
need a CMS (and I am one of the guilty parties here)
This is plan A essentially fulfilled - I suggest we start making
preparations to move forward and I've already committed to work
getting Zikula packaged.
15 years, 2 months
REMINDER: FDSCo Meeting today at 19:00UTC
by Eric Christensen
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
FDSCo Meeting today at 19:00UTC.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iEYEARECAAYFAkmAVUsACgkQfQTSQL0MFMHYkwCgspXyJJaVaJhw3JFDk//Qmuuc
w80AnA+c6Z1HpHhYDZu/FThwpNahexL8
=mIDy
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
15 years, 2 months
Requesting SVN commit access
by Scott Radvan
Hi folks,
Am writing to request write access to SVN for the Security Guide.
I figured it might make things go a little quicker. It would also free
up Sparks from putting in my changes so that he can focus on other stuff
as well.
So, is this OK with you guys?
Cheers,
--
Scott Radvan, Content Author
Red Hat APAC (Brisbane) http://www.apac.redhat.com
"Emancipation from the bondage of the soil is no freedom for the tree."
15 years, 2 months
What is the purpose of a Docs CMS?
by Karsten Wade
I see this come up all the time, it's what you call a 'frequently
asked question.' People wonder ...
... are we replacing the wiki with a CMS?
... is the CMS for authoring content collaboratively?
... or is the CMS for publishing already completed documents in
various formats (Oo.org, XML, HTML, PDF, etc.)?
In my mind, the CMS is for putting publishing of formal content in the
hands of people who know and care. Writers should be able to publish
drafts and completed versions. Editors should be able to fix and push
updates. Translators should be able to complete, publish, fix, and
update translations of guides.
Our current system is essentially checking rendered content in to
source control, and an auto-builder puts it on the web. Historically,
this system was never well adopted, even by people who otherwise know
and understand the tools. Instead, easier to use tools have drawn the
attention and content, such as wikis and blogs. The adoption rates
are staggering by comparison.
The original purpose of getting a CMS was to make publishing easy. We
already have a toolchain and process for getting content out of the
minds of the subject matters experts, on to the wiki, in to DocBook
XML, translated, and rendered to HTML, PDF, etc. All of that can now
scale very well to larger and larger teams. The only missing piece is
the ability to take all that content and put it on
docs.fedoraproject.org.
I purposely did not address the idea of people actually collaborating
on content that has the CMS as canonical. When asked, we refer to the
upstream fedorahosted.com versioning system as the canonical source.
In this way, the CMS is similar to koji -- raw source turned in to
packaged content.
It is possible that a team would want to use the CMS as a working
location. I'm tempted to cross that bridge when it happens, an idiom
which here means, let's figure out how to make that work when we come
to that decision point.
Our choice(s) and experience with CMS systems is going to inform the
Websites team on possible CMS choices for running underneath
fedoraproject.org. In that case, the content there would probably
live inside of the CMS as canonical. People would collaborate on it
directly in the CMS.
It would be great if the CMS or some other tool would give a
collaborative, browser based wysiwyg editing experience for DocBook
XML that is in a version control system. There are as many reasons
why that won't work as there are to give it a try. In the meantime
...
Make things clearer? Muddier? Slightly filmy but clear enough to
drive?
- Karsten
--
Karsten 'quaid' Wade, Community Gardener
http://quaid.fedorapeople.org
AD0E0C41
15 years, 2 months
Re: What is the purpose of a Docs CMS?
by A. Mani
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Jared Smith <jaredsmith(a)jaredsmith.net> wrote:
> 1) Revision control. One of the things we'd like this CMS to do is to
> provide revision control. So far, as I haven't seen a CMS that handles
> revision control nearly as cleanly as either the wiki or using an SCM
> system such as Subversion or git.
A revision control system with Web interface like Mercurial can be
integrated into most CMS and to different levels.
> 2) Document creation and editing. Ideally, we'd have a wysiwyg editing
> tool in the CMS that would output perfectly valid DocBook. I don't see
> this happening any time soon. This means that whatever we create inside
> the CMS doesn't lend itself well to repurposing or to easy translation.
Full WYSIWG for Docbook is not really needed. We should have different
tools that can deliver at least
some level of automatic docbook xml. Docbook is indispensable for a
project of this type.
Can't VEX or LYX be adapted for the job?
Best
A. Mani
--
A. Mani
Member, Cal. Math. Soc
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFJf5uSoIK4BlImohYRAuyuAKCspiCFWdF3y00i6wRQh2fSiSdWlQCeKa/i
LVwS54FYwjDyOhiIVr5Oqmw=
=BA9j
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
15 years, 2 months
Bad manners
by Paul W. Frields
Apologies for the recent spate of foul-language postings to the list.
I've removed the offender and banned the email address in question.
Paul
15 years, 2 months
Docs at Fedora Activity Day (FAD) [SCaLE 7x 20 Feb.]
by Karsten Wade
There is a FAD[1] happening at the Southern California Linux Expo
(SCaLE) 7x[2] on Friday 20 February. The Ambassadors have suggested that
the FAD focus be on Ambassadors and Docs. (A FAD is a short event of
Fedora contributors and participants that is focused on getting one or
two activities done.)
What would you suggest we focus on? Are you in or near Southern
California? Trip plans below.
My ideas so far:
* User Guide for F10 -- all wiki work, can use the Ambassador hardware
as systems to write from.
* DocBook in a Day -- ~1 hour tutorial, then get busy doing a task in
DocBook:
* Convert F{9,10} User Guide to XML
* Convert Installation Guide to Publican
* Installation Guide Rawhide Camp -- Test rawhide installs against the
IG and update content, make content projections for F11.
* Security Guide Pen Testing -- Attack the concepts in the Sec Guide;
configure systems to match SecG recommendations; whiteboard and LAN
penetration testing.
(Sort-of in order of difficulty.) Let's decide ASAP so Clint et al
can get the word out about our FAD focus.
My plan right now is to drive down from Nor Cal with Larry Cafiero and
a few crew. Is there is anyone we should/could pick up on the way?
SCaLE is being held at the Westin LAX, near LAX airport; we'll be
coming down I-5 on Thursday, I reckon.
If you know any Fedorans or potential Fedorans in the LA area, let's
use the FAD as a place they can explore deeper participation in the
project.
- Karsten
[1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Activity_Day_-_FAD
[2] http://scale7x.socallinuxexpo.org/
--
Karsten 'quaid' Wade, Community Gardener
http://quaid.fedorapeople.org
AD0E0C41
15 years, 2 months
Docs Leadership: How to get there from here.
by Eric Christensen
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
In today's meeting[1] we discussed new leadership in the Docs Project.
There was a mixed discussion about what kind of leadership we needed and
how to get them and the future of the Docs Project. At the end of the
discussion Karsten left us with three questions that I'm now passing
along to the list. Let's hear some ideas on this, please.
The three questions are:
1) Do we want to hold elections or just have someone appointed by our
current leadership to take the reigns.
2) Do we want a Steering Committee or Single Leader with Lieutenants to
direct this project (basically a single leader with help)?
3) And the biggest question is do we want the Docs Project to remain a
sub-project of Fedora or do we want to move to being a Special Interest
Group (SIG)?
These are big questions to answer so everyone's input will be especially
important.
[1]
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DocsProject/SteeringCommittee/Meetings/Min...
Thanks,
Eric Christensen
E-Mail: sparks(a)fedoraproject.org
GPG Fingerprint: CA02 4ACA EB6C 1A76 F0D6 1127 7D04 D240 BD0C 14C1
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iEYEARECAAYFAkl3qaQACgkQfQTSQL0MFMEubQCgm806KLeKWC7unH1FgnWhu0NE
jN0An2/wCqYN0O7t80WIs5SBY9AquAVD
=H+b0
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
15 years, 2 months
Re: What is the purpose of a Docs CMS?
by A. Mani
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
"Paul W. Frields" <stickster(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> * The wiki allows everyone to contribute with zero barrier to entry.
> Write and publish immediately. Since anyone can write anything
> there, caveat emptor.
>
> * A CMS with an easy editor would basically be the equivalent of "a
> wiki you can trust just a bit more," because there's an editorial
> staff dedicated to it by virtue of it being the "official"
> documentation site.
>
I think any good CMS would lessen the burden on the doc team
considerably and improve work flow (in comparison with a wiki based
system).
Contributors may also have a more polished interface to use.
Best
A. Mani
--
A. Mani
Member, Cal. Math. Soc
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFJfzU/oIK4BlImohYRAu/JAJ9Z/fJifyGtDlPijj5K4QzDVlMvrwCdGMzW
DKkgGd2upSzfiF6SPvnLMwo=
=mSIq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
15 years, 2 months
Alpha Release Readiness
by John Poelstra
With the Alpha Release for Fedora 11 scheduled for Tuesday, February 3,
2009, this means it is time to meet again with representatives from each
of the teams to have our release readiness meeting. We usually have
this meeting at 18:00 UTC (13:00 EST) the Wednesday before, which means
next Wednesday, January 28, 2009, is the day.
On Monday, January 26, 2009, I will be sending out the dial-in
information and a meeting reminder to all the attendees.
In the meantime I need to know who will be representing your group at
these meetings for the Fedora 11 meetings. Usually this is the
designated team leader, but I wanted to ask to make sure you coordinate
within your team to make sure someone comes. When responding to this
list, please CC me so that I am sure to see the reply.
This message is going out to the respective mailings lists for these groups:
Ambassadors
Artwork/Design
Documentation
FESCo
Infrastructure
Marketing
Quality
Release Engineering
Translation
Websites
Thanks,
John
15 years, 2 months