[haiku-doc] Re: Submitting content for documentation
- From: "Niels Reedijk" <niels.reedijk@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: haiku-doc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sat, 27 Dec 2008 16:39:33 +0100
Hi Humdinger,
2008/12/26 Humdinger <humdingerb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> Hi all.
>
> Up to now I simply sent diffs and PNGs to stippi who'd put it into SVN.
> Now with a few translations of the User Guide / Welcome Package about to
> roll in, we should establish how to deal with contributions in a more
> structured way.
I would say, open the svn book, get to know the basics. I'm sure
Stephan or Axel would be fine giving you an SVN account. I think to
this end you have proven yourself and I will vouch for you.
> To avoid duplication, I suggest we use the bugtracker. This query would give
> a nice list who's working on what:
> http://dev.haiku-os.org/query?status=assigned&status=new&status=reopened&group=reporter&reporter=~&component=^Documentation&order=priority&col=id&col=summary&col=component&col=status&col=type&col=priority&col=milestone
>
> We could decide on a standardized subject line to have all info at a glance,
> e.g.
> "it Userguide - Apps: StyledEdit, Showimage, CodyCam" or
> "en Userguide - Preferences: Media"
> The first two letter specifying the language that's been worked on.
> Or do you think we need have language categories added to Trac?
>
> When the work on a ticket is finished, you attach the diff plus any images
> to it. For translations, a "*.en-version.{rxxxxxx}" file for every html is
> also attached to specify what version of the English original was used for
> the translation (or it was checked against at a later point).
> Then add a "Please review and commit to the repository" comment to the
> ticket.
>
> Of course, someone with write access has to monitor the commit-mailing list
> and do the actual SVN insertion. Normally, the commits are watched by enough
> devs, but if it turns out that docu submissions are often overlooked, we may
> need someone dedicated for that.
> Let's see how it'll work out.
This sounds like something that would work, but rather I would suggest
considering using this mailing list as the main point of
communication. This will work most efficiently in my opinion.
Basically, the agreement should be that you are the main documentation
changes committer.
If it turns out that this method starts to complicate matters too
much, then we can always agree on doing something different.
The only thing that should be done in order to avoid oversized
attachments is to make good agreements on format and quality.
That would be my suggestions.
Kind regards,
Niels
Other related posts:
