Managing GNOME and KDE Docs

[Corey Burger]

Hmm, difficult one.

I would favour 2 seperate trees, gnome and kde. For a lot of the stuff
we are trying to do, there won't be a lot of overlap I don't think.
And that which does exist can be merged manually.

Just my thoughts. I will be honest and say that I probably won't be
devoting much time, if any, to KDE apps, as it is not my primary
desktop.

Corey


On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 08:08:03 +0200, Sean Wheller <sean at inwords.co.za> wrote:
> On Monday 14 March 2005 01:18, you wrote:
> > > The next problem is how to manage GNOME and KDE Documents effectively? We
> > > agree to do documents for Kubuntu. I would like to start with the K Quick
> > > Guide. Now, as I see it, we have a few options on how to manage this.
> > >
> > > 1. We document in the current quickguide.xml and use profiling.
> > > I don't think we can do this due to the fact that we have not decided
> > > whether or not ubuntu-docs will be dynamic under yelp or static html
> > > under any browser. Yelp does not currently support profiling, a method we
> > > would have to use if we wanted to manage in this way.
> > >
> > > 2. We document in the same folder in a file called kquickguide.xml
> > > This would be straight forward as we did with the gnome document. Screen
> > > capts continue to be places in images/
> > >
> > > 3. We make a more intrusive change by creating a trunk/gnome/ and
> > > trunk/kde/ where we create and maintain the two desktop docs seperately.
> > > In this case each would have an image/ folder so trunk/gnome/images/ and
> > > trunk/kde/images/ I the top level libs/, common/, etc. will remain.
> > > However, the make system will need splitting into two objects, one for
> > > kde and one for gnome. The root makefile can still hook these make
> > > subsystems.
> > >
> > > Do you think we should consider using one of these methods? Please vote
> > > and I will spawn a thread for this topic if required.
> >
> > +1 option 2 or 3. Option 1 does not look like it is doable at this point
> > in time.
> 
> Number 1 is possible but will require pre processing for GNOME documents.
> 
> Number 2 is a 'no brainer' but could become a mess unless we have a file
> naming convention.
> 
> Number 3 requires changes.
> 
> Any further thoughts on which route could be best? Pro's and Con's.
> 
> --
> Sean Wheller
> Technical Author
> sean at inwords.co.za
> http://www.inwords.co.za
> Registered Linux User #375355
> 
> 
> --
> ubuntu-doc mailing list
> ubuntu-doc at lists.ubuntu.com
> http://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-doc
> 
> 
> 
>