Re: documentation scope (Re: why o why [off topic])
On Thu, 2005-04-21 at 20:37 +0100, Stuart Ellis wrote:
On Thu, 2005-04-21 at 11:24 -0700, Karsten Wade wrote:
> Just like the Fedora Project, we cover only free software. Our first
> priority is to software that is in Core or Extras. Stand-alone docs
> that cover software not in Core or Extras is fine. Docs covering a
> subject area that has several choices will cover the choices in Core or
> Extra primarily. Choices that are outside of the project are noted as
> not being "supported by Fedora".
Do we have an existing document that could cover policy for
scope/lifecycle of docs (what we accept, how we support it, process of
obsoleting old work) ? These issues don't seem to neatly fit just Quick
Start, Documentation or CVS Usage.
I see this as the Documentation Guide. It is one of our few monolithic
documents. It could contain everything about this project, process,
lifecycle, workflow, how-to, what-is, etc.
Making separate or joined documents is just about the same thing. Since
it's already there, I'm in favor of adding to the Doc Guide as the
canonical for All Things FDP.
Deep linking into the Doc Guide allows us to point at specific sections.
The Wiki page for MasterTasks is updated to reflect these ideas. Let's
add more:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DocsProject/MasterTasks
Note that these are master tasks with some detail. Real RFE and bug
tracking should be done using bugzilla, where conversations and actions
can be archived.
- Karsten
--
Karsten Wade, RHCE * Sr. Tech Writer * http://people.redhat.com/kwade/
gpg fingerprint: 2680 DBFD D968 3141 0115 5F1B D992 0E06 AD0E 0C41
Red Hat SELinux Guide
http://www.redhat.com/docs/manuals/enterprise/RHEL-4-Manual/selinux-guide/
Attachments:
- signature.asc (application/pgp-signature — 189 bytes)