Re: An introduction

[John Fleck <jfleck inkstain net>]

I don't think we should turn this into a huge deal.

In my response, I was trying to elaborate on the point I thought Shaun
was trying to make. I didn't mean to sound like I was telling you how
you ought to do things. Sorry.

Like Eric, I always check stuff in on a regular basis as I'm working on
it - whenever I make major changes, and at the end of the day.

The fact that y'all don't has always made it a bit harder to keep track
of what you're doing. I think you've done a good job of keeping us
posted, minimizing the problem that poses. So, as I said, it's not a
huge deal.

It's also worth pointing out that y'all are also part of free software
now. You're no longer immigrants here, you've well earned your
citizenship papers, and it's not like there's one "right" way to do
this, just pluses and minuses.

You're part of the GDP too.

Cheers,
John

On Mon, 2004-01-26 at 08:09, Patrick Costello wrote:
> John, 
> 
> Do you know anybody who puts documentation drafts into CVS on a daily
> basis? 
> 
> Where is the working practise that you outline below included in the Free
> Software Foundation philosophy? 
> 
> All I can find in the FSF website is that "free software needs free
> documentation because you must be free to copy, change and redistribute the
> documentation along with the software." 
> 
> Note the "free to ... change" part. To my mind, this implies that people
> can modify free documentation, within the strictures of the GFDL, in any
> way that they need to do in the context of whatever software changes they
> are dealing with. If people want to work in the way that you describe, then
> that's really great. But I don't think that such a process should be made
> an obligation. In my opinion, such an obligatory process would be a
> limitation of the very freedom espoused by the FSF. 
> 
> Still, if that is the way the GDP now requires contributors to work, then I
> have to accept that. 
> 
> As I said in my previous mail to Shaun, I am discussing the implications of
> this development with the rest of the documentation team at Sun.
> 
> Pat
> 
> 
> John Fleck wrote:
> > 
> > Deirdre -
> > 
> > Hi. Good to hear from you.
> > 
> > I think you misunderstand the concern that Shaun is raising. The problem
> > is not that the Sun team is not keeping us posted on what manuals are
> > being worked on. It is the fact that the work is being done behind the
> > scenes, out of public view, and does not become public until a final
> > version of the manual is placed in CVS.
> > 
> > This is different than the normal GNOME working style - including the
> > working style used by the Sun hackers writing GNOME code. Most work is
> > placed in CVS as it is being worked on, on essentially a daily basis, in
> > draft form. That allows others to work collaboratively on the work as it
> > is in process, offering suggestions, revisions, etc. It also allows
> > anyone, transparently, to see where the work is headed.
> > 
> > I think Pat, Breda, Eugene and the others have worked mightily to keep
> > us apprised of the work that the Sun docs team has been doing, and I
> > appreciate those efforts. I think Shaun was raising a more subtle point
> > - that no one but the Sun people get to look at and contribute to the
> > work while it is in progress, and that this differs from the way
> > collaborative work is done throughout the rest of the GNOME project.
> > 
> > Cheers,
> > John
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > gnome-doc-list mailing list
> > gnome-doc-list gnome org
> > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-doc-list