14:12:48 #startmeeting fedora docs Weekly meeting 14:12:48 Meeting started Mon May 4 14:12:48 2015 UTC. The chair is randomuser. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 14:12:48 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 14:12:58 #topic roll call 14:13:00 * Capesteve is here 14:13:10 * pbokoc 14:13:24 my captive portal token was eaten by wolves :) 14:13:29 * rkratky is here 14:13:53 * smccann is here 14:13:53 /me is here 14:15:22 * bexelbie is here from his bed 14:15:25 #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Docs_Project_meetings#Standing_Agenda 14:15:46 #chair pkovar pbokoc 14:15:46 Current chairs: pbokoc pkovar randomuser 14:16:23 ok, let's get on with it 14:16:33 * randomuser has another meeting backing this one, unfortunately 14:16:42 #topic new writers 14:17:12 I'm pleased to have sponsored smccann and grundblom into docs-writers after their hard work updating the virt quickstart guide 14:17:27 cool 14:17:32 you are no longer new writers, congrats! 14:17:33 \o/ 14:17:52 huzzah!!! 14:18:34 now you have to bring in someone new so we have something to discuss in the first part of these meetings 14:18:45 yep, that's the deal 14:19:04 hi 14:19:04 once you're in, you have secondary recruitment responsibilities :) 14:19:18 hey, valebes, welcome! 14:19:42 yeah, we're basically Amway :)) 14:19:55 heh 14:20:11 ahahah... doc pyramid scheme much? 14:20:17 valebes, would you like to introduce yourself or ask questions, or shall we move on? 14:21:43 * randomuser moves on 14:21:49 #topic Publishing 14:22:11 so what's new? 14:22:25 I've brought up a couple things in recent meetings that were deferred to the list, but there wasn't much discussion on the list 14:22:54 so, I intend to go with a certain approach 14:23:35 share ideas for comment, allow some time for discussion, implement a well documented executive decision, and make room for it to be questioned or changed 14:24:12 ...anyway, I went to a conference and it ate up a bunch of time, so no new stuff to report, really 14:25:02 what about the website design problem? You mentioned you talked to someone from the design team before, and nothing significant happened, so you were going to open a ticket or something 14:25:06 I discovered https://github.com/ralphbean/bootstrap-fedora - the site theming used for basically all Fedora sites 14:25:24 right, a ticket... I'll do that today 14:25:31 * randomuser hangs head 14:26:15 :)) 14:26:27 #action randomuser to open design ticket for collaboration, already 14:26:55 anyway, for the new stuff, I want to use this fedora bootstrap theme 14:27:39 sounds good, there's little sense on building the look from scratch if this exists 14:27:58 I also looked more closely at what `publican publish --embedtoc` does, and there's a reference to a toc.html and toc.js that does the menu magic; this is created/maintained by the publican site commands 14:28:34 so, the plan is to generate the toc.html using anerist instead of publican, then we can have a known good docbook->html conversion 14:29:25 I *think* that also implies some automated conversion of the bootstrap-fedora css to publican-expected css 14:30:34 The infrastructure folks have graciously consented to my converting their process documentation to restructuredtext, so soon I'll have a git repo full of small RST articles to experiment with 14:31:37 help at any point is welcome, but I think we could best agree on the category structure, etc 14:32:00 so I'll start a wiki page on that in the next day or two and send a mail to the list asking for participation 14:32:32 randomuser: what format are or were the infrastructure docs in? 14:32:52 well, as always, I don't think I'd be able to help (don't know the first thing about websites or css) and I think a lot of us here in docs have the same problem :I 14:33:01 Capesteve, they were displayed as simple plain text, so it ranges from none to writer's habit (rst, markdown) 14:33:48 ta ( I not little of the advantages of the different types, just curious ) 14:34:03 know 14:34:25 pbokoc, well, I think we're all agreed that organizing documentation by subject rather than applicable release is a good 14:34:47 I have bad experience with markdown, I found that it the end DocBook is quicker if you include time to fix and improve 14:35:03 collaborating on a predefined list of categories doesn't take webdev experience 14:35:20 Capesteve, yeah, jhradilek was adamantly against md as well 14:35:23 yeah, ok, but it makes my head hurt :)) 14:36:07 restructuredtext seems better, and it's not much more complicated than markdown, so here we are 14:37:15 * pbokoc notes that bexelbie is often full of ideas on categories, personas and other meta stuff 14:37:27 * randomuser nods 14:37:34 * bexelbie is full ... 14:37:44 we should hang out sometime, bexelbie :) 14:38:16 :) 14:39:11 md has issues on the meta-data side but is dirt simple for intro/new writers 14:39:18 the formatting is kind of a disaster though 14:39:31 as for structure/categories, perhaps we should start lighter at first and see what we have 14:39:37 I haven't ever been able to use md without coopting extensions 14:39:37 rather than trying to define the tree and then fill it 14:40:11 * bexelbie has been trying to find time to read this: https://randomdeterminism.wordpress.com/2012/06/01/how-i-stopped-worring-and-started-using-markdown-like-tex/ 14:40:38 that's a familiar article and intent ... 14:41:06 in the end though, it may not matter - if we can go with a meta-data standard, it can be supplied by a side-file if the main format doesn’t support it 14:41:40 and perhaps we allow for a dynamic structure defined by the meta-data instead of curated by hand, with the idea that we can shape it up by fixing the files, not by forcing the writing to fit 14:42:24 bexelbie, sure - but I recall at one point you pointed out the problems with allowing arbitrary metadata values when using the metadata for dynamic structure generation 14:42:52 arbitrary values, yes, but if we only have this field with variations we may be able to control this 14:42:59 so, a defined taxonomy sounded prudent and a good opportunity for collaboration 14:43:02 and I suspect this would be a stop-gap for the start-up period 14:43:16 we can freeze where we are and formalize the taxonomy once we have lived with it for a bit 14:43:30 it can’t be worse than what we have (famous last words) and forward motion seems like a win 14:43:34 rihgt 14:44:00 ala https://sivers.org/walkways 14:44:00 basic stuff for now 14:44:15 hey, I have to bail, apparently that other meeting is starting early 14:44:25 pbokoc, pkovar you have the chairs 14:44:38 right 14:44:45 thanks 14:45:04 well, I guess that concludes the debate on publishing then 14:45:31 if you have anything, please write to the mailing list 14:45:55 #topic Release Notes 14:46:34 anyone got anything? Did anyone get yelled at because we missed a huge feature in relnotes, etc.? 14:48:02 yeah, I guess not 14:48:11 #topic Guide Status 14:48:44 Capesteve pushed a bunch of commits to the Sysadmin Guide about DNF, yayyyyy 14:49:01 * Capesteve is waiting for DNF devs to review DNF chapter, but has pushed it in the mean time 14:49:18 please pull, build, review 14:49:54 I will chase DNF devs for their review during this week 14:50:18 yeah, that's not a bad idea. The repo is here if anyone wants to take a look: https://git.fedorahosted.org/cgit/docs/system-administrators-guide.git/ 14:52:56 #topic Open floor 14:53:07 I've got nothing, but if anyone else does, now's your time 14:59:31 pbokoc, time to call it I think 15:00:08 #endmeeting