On 05/01/2016 04:56 AM, Nikola M wrote:
I would like you have been doing this not alone, but within Openindiana
community and cooperation with others, with announcing it here.
Also using Openindiana brand name outside openindiana.org for site names
(like .ninja etc) is not good, since it is where search engines might
forward people and that lowers openindiana.org rank.
I agree.
Should this technology demonstration be accepted, the site should adopt
an OpenIndiana.org cname. We could for example call it
docs.openindiana.org. And naturally it would also follow to move to
repository itself under OpenIndiana project's github umbrella.
Being a technology demonstration, the announcement of this site is
primarily to showcase what is possible with today's front end web
development technologies.
For example, the site is completely static, and uses a responsive and
mobile friendly CSS layout. There are no page generating engines, nor
any databases, just a GitHub repository with a publishing branch hosted
on GitHub pages.
Not only that, but the repository can be configured for continuous
integration with Travis-CI. At that point, the site and it's contents
automatically builds and deploys upon git commit.
All Openindiana infrastructure things can be easily covered within OI's
infrastructure, regarding the need for test sites, GIT repositories, and
in-development documentation hosting.
I disagree.
A project is not defined by where it hosts it's code, docs, etc.
Besides, why re-invent the wheel?
Github is out there and many projects (much larger than OI) are using it
to their full advantage. For an example, go have a look at the Jenkins
project.
All contributions to OI's docs must follow it's license and can't be
re-licensed (Marguger asked weither he can re-license Opensolaris docs
to some other docs, answer is:no.
Licensing is something which should be discussed further. In particular
we should talk about what we need to do to ensure we're in compliance
with whatever license applies to each work.
That said I am not convinced the PDL should be applied to new works that
do not contain any previously PDL licensed content. New works could for
example use an MIT license.
A copy of the PDL license is hosted along with the books here:
http://makruger.github.io/website/pages/books/pdl.html
That includes contributor agreement, now to OI, so that documentation
dos not need nor should include any personal "Copyright" notices, except
CVS logs and contributor notes.
So this should be hosted on openindiana.org.
and "© The OpenIndiana Project 2016 - All Rights Reserved" is invalid
and is not valid open documentation license, even someone could argue it
actually represent accepting contributor agreement, but I suggest to
also use standard documentation license so it could be reused like
Opensolaris docs can be used because of that.
I disagree.
The PDL contributor agreement provides full copyright assignment with
"all rights reserved" to both the original document author(s) as well as
to anyone making changes.
The spirit of the contributer agreement is to keep track of who made the
changes, so they can be given proper credit.
Git fully meets the requirements of PDL section 3.3, as each commit
shows the author, contact email, and what was changed.
There is also reason why Opensolaris docs are made in XML using XML
editing applications, so we can easily have html and PDF versions of any
docs, using existing tools.
I disagree.
There is absolutely no good reason to use XML in the production of new
documentation. Nor is there any good reason for existing docs to even
remain in the XML format (Here I am referring to the OSOL books).
The text markup technologies used in this demonstration site (asciidoc
along with the asciidoctor documentation framework) can easily produce
HTML and PDF. They can also produce EPUB, docbook, man pages, and a
bunch of other formats as well.
For more information (and a convincing argument against the use of text
editors, XML, etc.) I would refer you to the Asciidoctor website:
http://asciidoctor.org/docs/what-is-asciidoc/
You should check and consult with someone before moving with this. Doing
it alone is never good as it doesn't represent OI as a community product
and more heads are always smarted then one. :)
If doing alone after it grows, it gets harder to fix issues and then you
used to complain that there are too many issues and changes with your
texts. That is normal to have issues :)
Yes of course, the community should be involved with the evolution of
the project's documentation and the technologies used to present them.
Working on this website or any of content is as simple as forking the
repository and submitting a pull request.
Michael
_______________________________________________
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev
