X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Message-ID: <53528F6C.8020400@ecosensory.com>
Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2014 09:59:56 -0500
From: John Griessen <john AT ecosensory DOT com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Subject: [geda-user] gEDA documentation gedasymbols etc  (was: Wiki structure)
References: <alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 10 DOT 1404182110510 DOT 20519 AT home DOT local>	<201404182030 DOT s3IKUJAN002585 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com> <CAC4O8c8YWyQq7w++kVXm0=d1nVbopNMizj7ux-9iGk0OfL=WTg AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
In-Reply-To: <CAC4O8c8YWyQq7w++kVXm0=d1nVbopNMizj7ux-9iGk0OfL=WTg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-RR-Connecting-IP: 107.14.168.118:25
X-Cloudmark-Score: 0
Reply-To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com

On 04/19/2014 12:37 AM, Britton Kerin wrote:
> I respectfully submit that DJ and Peter are probably not the best
> people to make judgements about how the gEDA docs might be improved.
> They are the most expert users around and aren't well situated to
> judge what is confusing and off-putting to new users.
>
> How about letting people who want to improve the docs have a shot at
> it?  Note that this would necessarily involve letting them remove some
> things, as gEDA docs are seriously plagued by redundancy and unclarity
> about what the new user needs to read to get going.
>
> Britton

Oh, maybe, but they have put out a lot of effort and you can start off contributing
by helping them keep things orderly and easy to maintain.  They way I read what
DJ said, was not about your intended rewrite's quality, by only using a wiki,
where maintenance is large to combat site defacing by spammers and vandals.


Some are put off by cvs being used to keep gedasymbols easily
done.  Git is tailored for top down domination by Linus T., not as a convenient
tool for small projects.  Would anyone consider this -- choose
an intentionally small project oriented version control system
rather than the most "famous" one?  How about considering fossil?

https://www.fossil-scm.org/index.html/doc/tip/www/index.wiki

It comes with a website for version control display and project tracking, operates in
central repository mode while making it easy to do separate work in branches.

It's not perfect, just something to consider.  I'm not sure if it can do the
split sub-project like cvs does for gedasymbols.org, but we could make a
gedasymbols.org site with logins and areas for publishing and each person publishing
could login to publish.  Django is designed for login sites with areas of
responsibility driven by a database.  Then some version
control could be used on the gedasymbols.org site as a whole.

Fossil seems good for the making of a documentation site as well as for PCB
and gschem.  Not sure what the best version control for a database driven app
site is though.