Converting to Mallard?

Kyle Nitzsche kyle.nitzsche at canonical.com
Fri Apr 16 13:20:23 UTC 2010


Sorry about that Matthew. I don't have that email in my ubuntu-docs mail 
folder and never actually saw it until now.

Cheers,
Kyle
On 04/16/2010 01:56 AM, Matthew East wrote:
> Hi Kyle,
>
> On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 2:54 PM, Kyle Nitzsche
> <kyle.nitzsche at canonical.com>  wrote:
>    
>> Still, I propose that as a
>> *general goal*, docs should be more modular in their packaging to enable
>> remixing content into variants. We simply need to start to treat ubuntu
>> docs not as an end it itself for Ubuntu, but as an *upstream* to Ubuntu
>> variants.
>>      
> This is not really related to the original post, which deals with the
> markup language in which we are writing documentation, and is a
> different objection to the one which you raised to Phil's post, which
> was about whether upstream content was appropriate for Ubuntu and
> whether Mallard supported the removal of content.
>
> You've raised and re-raised this idea on several different occasions
> now and the more that happens, the more difficult it becomes to track
> historical discussion of the idea. In my opinion it would be helpful
> for the team if discussion of this idea (if it continues) be focused
> in one place, so that we can keep track of people's views and resolve
> the subject once and for all.
>
> I would really like it if rather than continue to raise this idea on
> different threads, you simply respond to this post, which remains
> unanswered:
>
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-doc/2010-January/014277.html
>
> The discussion can then take place on that thread. Obviously I don't
> have a problem discussing this topic at a team meeting either if you
> prefer (or in addition) but I'd just like to ensure that we can easily
> find the arguments and counter-arguments when we need to.
>
>    





More information about the ubuntu-doc mailing list