Re: [Gimp-developer] Notice to documentation contributors: plans to update the gimp-help repository

[Jehan Pagès <jehan marmottard gmail com>]

Hi all!

On Thu, Jun 3, 2021 at 10:39 PM Marco Ciampa via gimp-developer-list <
gimp-developer-list gnome org> wrote:

> On Thu, May 20, 2021 at 03:46:13AM +0200, Jehan Pagès wrote:
> > Hello all!
>
> Sorry for the late reply...
>
> > Some efforts is being made to improve a bit the documentation process:
> >
> > 1. A Python 3 port is being worked on right now by Jacob Boerema (see
> > https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gimp-help/-/merge_requests/50). He nearly
> > finished. I don't think anyone is against this since Python 2 is EOL, but
> > if anyone has any comment, please feel free. Also Jacob has some issues
> > with the `xml_helper.py` script so we wondered if this one was actually
> > being used by anyone actually contributing to the documentation (because
> if
> > not, and it is not considered useful anymore, maybe some time can be
> saved
> > by dropping this script).
> > In any case, feel free to test the associated branch and make any remark.
>
> It's ok for me.

For the record, we merged the Python 3 port today. So gimp-help is now at
least a bit less outdated! 🤣

Damned Lies broke on POT generation for this module though, because of
missing dependencies (cf.
https://gitlab.gnome.org/Infrastructure/damned-lies/-/issues/236) but I
guess it should be fixed soon.

By the way, I would like to propose for Jacob Boerema to be promoted as
co-maintainer on the gimp-help repository, since I believe he is now the
one who knows the best its technical logics, scripts and alike among still
active contributors (actually even considering activity on gimp-help in the
last 10 years, he did the most in the last few weeks). For the record,
Jacob has been a very active GIMP contributor for a year now, and he is
doing excellent technical work.
I believe the gimp-help repository can only benefit from having someone
technical-side among its co-maintainers.

Thus is there any of the current maintainers against adding Jacob as a new
co-maintainer? I'll take an absence of answer as being OK with it, but if
you read and are in favor, I will appreciate even a short answer. 😉
If none is against it, I propose we add him on the maintainers list in a
week or so.

By the way, if anyone wants to update some data in the list, please tell me
(if you don't want to be considered a maintainer anymore for instance
because you went to do something else and have no time anymore for
gimp-help; or if you just want to update your email address, etc.). At
least one person in the current list has an email address which doesn't
work anymore.
For current info, see:
https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gimp-help/-/blob/master/gimp-help.doap



> > 2. We are considering branching the tree (to `gimp-help-2-10`) so that
> the
> > `master` branch will be used for preparing the documentation specific to
> > GIMP 3, whereas any work specific to the 2.10.x series can continue on
> the
> > new branch.
>
> Ok I'll finish updating the Italian translation presumably tomorrow.

Cool. Maybe we'll hold off the branching a day or 2 to first resolve the
Damned Lies issues and if we find any more little details to fix before
branching.

> > We feel like these 3 plans could be done in about 2 weeks (so let's say
> the
> > weekend of June 5/6), but if anyone feels like this is wrong, or that
> > things should be done differently, please tell us before we merge the
> > Python 3 port and branch the `master` tree, please.
>
> It's ok for me.
>
> > Róman Joost, Ulf-D. Ehlert, Marco Ciampa, Julien Hardelin, Michael
> Natterer
> > and Michael Schumacher (all in BCC) in particular, you are the
> > co-maintainers of this repository (if the `MAINTAINERS` and .doap files
> are
> > still up-to-date), so we'd appreciate your input in particular. Any other
> > contributor is welcome to give an opinion too of course. We don't want to
> > do any mistake. 🙂
> >
> > The third plan we have (not within a 2-week schedule, but hopefully at
> > least before GIMP 3 release) is that we wonder if a better process for
> > releases of the documentation (on the website in particular) could not be
> > done. Maybe we are wrong, but it feels like the release/update into the
> > wild could be improved, couldn't it?
> > What we are thinking are things like tagging the tree leading to
> automatic
> > (or at least easier) build then publication of the documentation online,
> > probably through the Continuous Integration pipelines (we have been
> > improving GIMP release the same way lately, by generating source tarballs
> > automatically, and these days, we are doing the same with the Windows
> > installer).
>
> I would appreciate (=volunteer to translate) a multilanguage site...
>
> > So same here, if anyone has any opinion or wishes on how the
> documentation
> > process should be improved, we welcome the ideas and propositions.
>
> I have one for the future... I'll explain after the branch...

Cool. Let's discuss this when the time comes then! 🙂

Jehan


> > Thanks all!
>
> Thank YOU!
>
> --
>
> Saluton,
> Marco Ciampa
> _______________________________________________
> gimp-developer-list mailing list
> List address:    gimp-developer-list gnome org
> List membership:
> https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list
> List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list


-- 
ZeMarmot open animation film
http://film.zemarmot.net
Liberapay: https://liberapay.com/ZeMarmot/
Patreon: https://patreon.com/zemarmot
Tipeee: https://www.tipeee.com/zemarmot