DevApp Content Life-cycle [was: Re: Wiki ideas]

[George Deka]

If it means what we need does not exist so be it,
cannoncial may be willing to sponsor the development or put up a bounty.
Regardless we need something that we can work with, which will make
everyone happy.


On Apr 2, 2005 5:29 PM, Nick Loeve <ubuntu at trickie.org> wrote:
> Sean Wheller wrote:
> > On Saturday 02 April 2005 02:19, Nick Loeve wrote:
> >
> >>Sean Wheller wrote:
> >>
> >>>On Friday 01 April 2005 11:11, Mark Shuttleworth wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>Let's see what we can get done at UDU, but in parallel, let's see what
> >>>>you guys come up with.
> >>>
> >>>Hello Mark, Corey,
> >>
> >><snip><snip>
> >>
> >>
> >>  - Surely security can be achieved with other technologies - i have had
> >>
> >>    a lot of experience with PHP and would be willing to help share my
> >>    experience with PHP and security issues
> >
> >
> > I think we are in the right here, but it is also hard to change perceptions.
> > If James and team don't want then I kinda get the feeling that we could be
> > fighting a losing battle unless we host externally.
> 
> Agreed, and i do not really mind at all. I love most of the technology
> that Ubuntu and it's developers are pushing and would like to become
> more proficient using those tools.
> 
> >
> >
> >>  - I do not think that a web based solution is the way to go for
> >>    everything. I know that for a large document (or even for something
> >>    as big as the quickguide) it is more manageable if editing is
> >>    offline)
> >
> >
> > Agreed. As I see it, a web-based front end is just one interface. Under the
> > objective I never mentioned that the only editing interface would be
> > Web-based. I do state that the Authoring repos is a working copy of svn. The
> > way I see it is that we will merge changes from this working copy into our
> > svn. Think of the web-app as just another user/author in the team. Just an
> > author on steroids because it is actually the work on many more people.
> 
> Ok, that makes sense.
> 
> >
> > The nature of the solution I suggested in that it enforces structure from the
> > content to the organization of the information architecture. This makes it
> > far more managable than what we have now.
> >
> >
> >>And after all that, to get back to another of Sean's point, those
> >>working on this project will not be creating documentation. Maybe what
> >>we need is a seperate subteam 'Ubuntu Documentation Technology Team' or
> >>something. That way energy is not being sapped from the documenation
> >>effort, but those that want to contribute to both seperate ideas
> >>(creating docs, creating a system for creating docs) are free to do so.
> >>
> >>At present the doc team is pretty small, so i do not know if there is
> >>enough man power to create another seperate team, but over time the
> >>'Ubuntu Documentation Technology Team' could attract existing or new
> >>Ubutnu developers, and build closer ties with those that are in the know
> >>in regards to building software for Ubuntu, deploying software for
> >>Ubutnu and maintaining software Ubutnu.
> >>
> >
> >  If I understand Mark correctly, he is saying let the doc team forge an idea
> > and present it, then he will muster devels to support it. From our part we
> > need to to the investigation. I suggest we create a specification document
> > based on our resarch and use that to present. Once devels get involved we can
> > assist in ways we can, if we wish.
> 
> Ok great. I originally wanted to do some development for Ubuntu, but got
> into the doc team because (with no experience of Debian development etc)
> the barriers to entry were lower. I would really love to be part of any
> development for this idea, but have also enjoyed and want to keep
> enjoying working with the team on documenation and discussing ideas
> surrounding the generation of documentation.
> 
> >
> > I will start preparing a basic document for us to collaborate on. In the
> > interim I think it would be productive if people search for solutions and
> > post links to the list under this thread. We can then discuss each solution
> > and narrow down the list to the top 3 candidates.
> 
> Agreed. Thats a great idea, thanks for taking on the setup.
> 
> 
> Cheers,
> trickie (Nick Loeve)
> 
> --
> ubuntu-doc mailing list
> ubuntu-doc at lists.ubuntu.com
> http://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-doc
> 


-- 
<a href="http://spreadfirefox.com/community/?q=affiliates&id=82&t=1">Get
Firefox!</a>