Direction of the Ubuntu system docs

[Jonathan Jesse]

On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 4:03 PM, Phil Bull <philbull at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Jonathan,
>
> On Mon, 2010-12-20 at 13:07 -0500, Jonathan Jesse wrote:
> > If you look at the last post from SABDFL you will see that anything
> > lands in the trunk for Unity needs to have the contributor agreement
> > signed.  So if the changes only stay in ubuntu-docs a contribution
> > agreement won't be needed
>
> That's true, but the problem is, if Canonical decide to release Unity
> under a license that's incompatible with ubuntu-docs, they might just
> rewrite the Unity docs and add them directly into the package. If that
> happens, we've effectively wasted our time. This makes the docs more
> difficult to upstream too (although we could create a unity-docs
> package, I suppose).
>
> This only amounts to a hypothetical risk and a minor annoyance, so it's
> not a massive deal. It does make me feel uneasy about the relationship
> between the docs team, Ubuntu, and Canonical, though. If we don't sign
> the agreement, will we end up marginalised as a team?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Phil
> --
> Phil Bull
> https://launchpad.net/~philbull
> Book - http://nostarch.com/ubuntu4.htm
>
>
This really goes back to the point of your original email and the point of
ubuntu-docs.  Things are a bit more straight-forward for kubuntu-docs as we
don't have to deal w/ Unity.  For kubuntu-docs we are trying to provide
documentation on how KDE/Kubuntu does things.  The docs are a bit more
updated and current then they have been but still need  lots of love for
Natty and going forward.
Is there a way to bring Ubuntu Manual/Ubuntu Docs back together to get a
solid release of documentation?  Or are we willing to wait for the different
books to cover that material?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-doc/attachments/20101220/32e430a9/attachment.html>