14:00:58 #startmeeting Docs Project Meeting - Agenda: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Docs_Project_meetings 14:00:58 Meeting started Mon Apr 13 14:00:58 2015 UTC. The chair is randomuser. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 14:00:58 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 14:00:58 #meetingname Fedora Docs 14:00:58 The meeting name has been set to 'fedora_docs' 14:00:58 #topic Roll Call 14:01:14 * pbokoc 14:01:24 * lnovich1 is here 14:01:29 * bexelbie is here 14:02:06 need to run to another meeting sorry I can't stay at the moment 14:03:01 #chair bexelbie pbokoc 14:03:02 Current chairs: bexelbie pbokoc randomuser 14:03:59 * bexelbie takes a seat :) 14:04:07 hello 14:04:17 #here 14:04:22 dangit 14:04:36 morning, grundblom 14:04:43 * smcann is here 14:04:44 Good Morning! 14:06:16 #topic follow up on action items 14:06:40 out last meeting was canceled because it was empty 14:07:17 in the previous meeting, I was going to .. do stuff for the release notes 14:07:53 and I think that's getting done 14:08:09 #topic New Writers 14:08:32 hrm 14:08:38 /me is latše 14:08:43 late , rather 14:08:53 I have to step away for a few minutes, if someone could carry on? 14:09:49 on the new writer front - I put in my last commits to the virt-manager chapter of the virt-getting started guide (private branch) 14:09:56 bexelbie, it's on you 14:10:16 * bexelbie will try 14:10:26 Are there any new writers present? 14:10:31 new writer: I think I am done with the boxes chapter on my repo under rundblom_boxes chapter 14:10:33 as opposed to most recent committers :) 14:10:41 I'll be offline mostly for the next coupel of weeks, but y'all can email if there is more comments/ fixes needed to that chapter 14:10:45 I also made an attempt to write for the entertainment beat 14:10:51 +1 smcann and grundblom 14:11:11 grundblom, in the wiki? 14:11:11 smcann, and grundblom do you have a plan for finalizing your commits and getting them to master? 14:11:43 last I heard, either lnovich or randomuser was going to take both and merge/recreate the getting started guide 14:12:02 pbokoc, yes, 14:12:35 lnovich stepped away, so hopefully randomuser can confirm where he is with that plan when he returns - or if we need to find some additional help 14:13:18 bexelbie, I think I need some more time and training with git before I commit them to someplace real / serious 14:13:45 right now I have been only in my own personal repo and had to recover a couple times from being new 14:13:51 grundblom, I respect. It sounds like randomuser is going to do the merge for you - one thing that would be nice from a helping other new contributors perspective is if you could spell out some of your questions 14:13:53 I'm probably in the same boat - not to be trusted w/ the sharp knives yet 14:14:01 answering them would help us improve the guide for new writers 14:14:04 ditto to smcann 14:14:11 grundblom, right. Well, the issue is that none of the other beats have similar info - which version of what is shipped in the release... we mostly only cover changes, new and deprecated functionality 14:15:19 pbokoc, oh that makes sense, So I need to find out what the new version of rhythmbox does different, if anything 14:15:43 grundblom, yeah, that would work better 14:16:18 and if there aren't any significant changes, we usually just ignore it. The relnotes are never totally comprehensive, only high-level user-facing stuff 14:16:36 documenting every change in everything... that way lies madness :) 14:16:55 fwiw on entertainment, I read somewhere that f22 will have an updated libimobiledevice package which will allow me to sync iphone IOS 8 14:17:48 thanks smcann, that sounds cool! I will go investigate that 14:18:13 cool 14:18:40 http://www.libimobiledevice.org/ 14:19:24 alright, anyone else have anything? I think the stuff you folks have in private branches would be better discussed after the meeting with randomuser 14:19:30 and this is what made me think int's coming in f22 https://apps.fedoraproject.org/packages/libimobiledevice 14:20:41 * randomuser pops back in 14:21:02 let's continue with the next topic then 14:21:04 yes, the plan is for me to merge grundblom and smcann's branches into master when they are ready 14:21:27 #topic Release Notes Beats 14:21:42 now, where was that query again 14:22:08 #link http://red.ht/1IOcNdu - query showing all Change bugs accepted for f22 14:22:23 #info Beats are getting closed on wiki 14:22:28 we still have 9 bugs unclaimed (not counting the ones on NEW) 14:22:57 there's like 3 in there about GNOME (GNOME 3.16, something about Nautilus and new notifications) 14:23:10 we really should cover that 14:23:23 any volunteers? :) 14:23:42 I heard pkovar likes writing gnome stuff 14:23:54 yeah, now that you mention it... 14:24:38 wink wink 14:24:42 there's also one for KDE (Plasma 5), but rkratky isn't here 14:24:55 the Workstation beat needs to be [re]written still as well 14:24:58 randomuser: i will see what i can do 14:25:09 pkovar, thanks :) 14:25:30 pkovar, set yourself as docs contact on the bugs you cover, please 14:25:57 #info Edition overviews were left intact, because we want to give an overview of them and not simply describe changes 14:26:13 pbokoc: will do when i get to it 14:26:22 cool, thanks 14:27:49 also I asked some others to write a few beats - yruseva for preupgrade-assistant and bara said she'll do some of the python-related stuff, that's like 2 bugs 14:28:18 so I guess we're mostly good, I'll just need to talk to the installer team and get them to tell me what changed there 14:28:39 anything else? 14:29:03 #action randomuser to close beats on wiki 14:29:04 sorry I had to step out but now I am back - and on the beat note - still waiting for Cole to tell me what's included 14:29:38 lnovich, included where? 14:29:46 lnovich, you could always research it yourself, if all else fails :P 14:29:53 what features 14:30:29 i know i can do it myself - but at last I spoke to him, he wasn't sure himself what would go in and what wouldn't 14:31:09 we're in a package freeze at the moment, nothing new is going in 14:31:47 ok so he should know at this point 14:31:52 yep 14:31:52 anyway, he's a good source, we don't need to dwell on it 14:33:05 so anyway 14:33:28 #topic Publican/Publishing 14:33:39 randomuser, you wanted to talk about old guides? 14:33:48 I do, yes 14:34:07 when we migrate to.. whatever, we will have to republish everything 14:34:31 that could be interesting ... 14:34:43 and there are diminishing returns in publishing older guides, as the work involved to get them republished goes up, and the efficacy of the content goes down 14:35:13 so I'm proposing that we don't keep publishing guides more than one release past EOL 14:35:19 if we can do it way after or way before a release it would have the least amount of impact 14:35:45 randomuser, taht is very reasonable … would we want to run them out to pdf (if we can) and use that as the “archive” format? 14:36:09 hey, I was just about to suggest that! 14:36:23 yeah, I like that idea 14:36:34 way better to do it that way than to remove.... 14:36:37 * bexelbie read pbokoc’s mind and typed faster than him 14:36:56 some kind of vulcan mind meld? 14:37:13 I knew you americans were in my head! Friggin HAARP and alien technology... 14:37:19 bexelbie, although, do keep in mind that I'm not intending to go forward with an only-publican-guide content set 14:37:37 you forgot to wear your aluminum foil hat again, didn't you? 14:37:43 let me provide some context, I guess 14:37:45 https://imgflip.com/s/meme/Ancient-Aliens.jpg 14:37:47 randomuser, meaning what exactly to make sure we are on the same page 14:38:19 the automated tooling I'm working on will watch branches fN ... f19, f20, f21, f22, etc 14:38:34 right 14:38:51 I've set it up to watch specifically those branches, because that's the naming convention used everywhere else 14:39:10 makes sense - so you want version level branches that can be republished easily … 14:39:15 so we don't have to manually maintain that list, I set it up to query pkgdb and get the branch names 14:39:26 makes sense 14:39:38 that works well 14:39:51 * bexelbie doesn’t think of that as a publican-only process 14:40:08 sounds more like a version control process 14:40:17 so the question is, do we want to watch and publish branches for all possible fedora releases, or do we want to do a subset of them? 14:40:30 * bexelbie votes for a subset 14:40:41 active only - archive the rest 14:40:44 with output to PDF on frozen non-published branches 14:40:54 to keep those who stick around post-EOL happy 14:41:11 well, we could do N EOL releases for that 14:41:22 as there are those still using F9 - I actually had to help support someone on it ...don't ask! 14:41:41 I've got exactly one mode of support for F9 users... 14:42:01 yeah, clue-by-four 14:42:24 besides the extra overhead, the project as a whole does not support EOL releases and the cultural norm is to be very discouraging about using them 14:43:03 yeah, but at the same time, we don't really update and republish all content for each new release 14:43:04 i say we keep older EOL releases available - but with all appropriate warnings and labels and PDF only and only update those that matter 14:43:37 some guides are outdated, and I wouldn't want to just slap a new release version on the old content and republish it as "better than nothing" 14:43:45 +1 14:44:08 I would like to think we have higher value standard than that 14:44:13 pbokoc, ideally, we could destroy the publishing infrastructure at any time and recreate it by firing the builder instance again 14:44:14 if it stays on the site, but it's marked as e.g. F18 and there's no newer one, it tells users that they shouldn't expect everything to work the same 14:44:53 I like the idea of what you're saying, lnovich, but it means a whole lot more work than simply publishing those branches as-is, without comment 14:45:41 we once thought about putting cobwebs on the doc with a tagline that said something like - This content is rather dusty, if you want to clean it up, click here to become a docs contributor 14:46:03 adding labels takes work, setting up the frontend to display EOL stuff or only PDFs takes more work, generating different build sequences takes work... 14:46:08 or something like that 14:46:52 * randomuser nods 14:47:41 it's a neat idea 14:47:42 im just thinking out loud, but if we remove the content entirely, will anyone notice? 14:48:05 lnovich, to be clear, I'm not planning on removing anything from web.git 14:48:11 and if they don't should we worry about it? 14:48:26 i mean from the web server 14:48:31 I think people will probably notice, and I'm ok with that 14:49:01 well, another thing is that... currently, if someone sees e.g. the Accessibility guide on the website, and they see the last release was for F14, it might prompt them to join and help. If the guide isn't there, most people would probably think we just don't have any guide like that, and we're not interested in it 14:49:12 you can't get F12 packages on your F21 instance, it doesn't align with that to provide F12 docs 14:49:31 pbokoc, it would be pretty easy to create a list of not-published guides, fwiw 14:50:04 maybe just remove the doc from the webserver, make a 404 splash page and see how many are looking for it before we provide a PDF 14:50:07 I agree that we should call out when something was last updated - but I don’t like the current display - but that is window dressing 14:50:10 although, that would come from a deprecated publican guide list, and some repos would potentially be a whole collection of articles, so it doesn't completely translate 14:50:39 randomuser, well, I'm afraid less people would see a list somewhere - because they won't be specifically looking for it 14:50:50 do we just archive the old site as a whole and put it on a server and let it sit and rot? and not worry about going to far past EOL 14:51:07 instead, I think people google something like "Fedora accessibility", get the ancient guide, see that there's no newer one... you know 14:51:35 bexelbie, I think we probably would do that... but if we have a policy about maintaning a given number of guides, it would catch up after a few releases 14:51:48 also, someone is working on the accessibility guide right now :) 14:52:37 do we know / care how other projects handle this issue? 14:52:43 perhaps we can find a way to pull the guides forward without rebranding in the branching scheme … alal the f20 docs included this f14 historical beauty 14:52:48 yeah, I know 14:53:48 of course what will happen once the design team goes through with their plans? all of this talk may be for nothing 14:53:52 it sounds like there's a lot to discuss here, perhaps we should continue on the list 14:54:18 * bexelbie wonders if we could find people who want to go through the old guides and test/scope the changes to make getting contributors/updates happier (I don’t know who would do this …) 14:54:24 +1 on list 14:55:21 bexelbie, I'm hoping that if we give people a platform where they can write simple articles without buying into maintaining and integrating an entire guide, contributions will go up 14:55:52 randomuser, I agree - but I also think that will mean a greater need for content strategy 14:55:58 indeed 14:56:01 content policy as well 14:56:23 I keep picturing us ending up with a process similar to the package review process 14:56:40 with guidelines and per-article review 14:56:46 we may and it may not be a bad thing - if done correctly 14:56:55 there seems to be a lot of packages in the repo, so it must work :P 14:57:12 especially if one can get badges for packages! 14:57:15 it is a question of manpower too 14:57:20 yes, you get badges for packages 14:57:26 but yes, that process could well work 14:57:26 i mean patches 14:57:31 bexelbie, definitely bootstrapping involved :P 14:57:35 in the area of what do other folks do - I can't find docs in openstack other than for the most recent release.. .at least not the operating guide 14:57:40 * bexelbie just looks strapping in boots 14:57:55 I'd also like some comment on the metadata proposal I sent to the list 14:57:57 TMI Bex 14:58:02 Hi 14:58:02 because this thing is going to need it 14:58:14 I think a lot of projects are moving to “step 1 is run the current code” model 14:58:14 hi valebes! 14:58:23 not very enterprise friendly, but helps with these answers 14:58:23 How are you? 14:58:26 and if you don't comment, I'm just going to start adding those metada files to your guides 14:59:14 metada! metadata!madata! 14:59:53 bexelbie, yeah, and the first step in any troubleshooting process is "do you have the latest packages for your supported release" 15:00:09 metadata - for what purpose 15:00:17 * randomuser notes there was a proposal to cancel the QA meeting 15:00:26 randomuser, with the same challenges - this kind of loops back to our personas conversation 15:00:48 for some variants, like perhaps workstation (with fedup) it may be reasonable to say your not in X revisions - upgrade 15:00:56 with others like server we may need to make things available longer 15:01:11 Okay, I have another meeting, gtg 15:01:17 * bexelbie needs to read the meta data email as he is behind 15:01:32 yes, please do 15:01:37 * randomuser & 15:02:19 ok will do 15:03:39 ok - are we ending the meeting? 15:04:27 * bexelbie thinks we should and continue on list 15:04:51 yes but someone - the chair needs to end the meeting so that it is official 15:04:59 alright then 15:05:05 #endmeeting