Re: [CentOS-docs] discussions around upstream documentation

2016-04-11 Thread François Cami
On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 8:30 PM, Christoph Galuschka
 wrote:
> Hi Jim,
>
> Am 11.04.2016 um 18:18 schrieb Jim Perrin:
>>
>> There is a Fedora Activity Day
>> (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FAD_Documentation_2016 ) centered around
>> documentation, where I'm going to see what can be done about the state
>> of centos documentation from upstream sources.
>>
>> Most of the tooling for documentation for these two groups is centered
>> around git. For the most part, our documentation currently lives in the
>> wiki, and has a fairly high barrier to new contributors.
>>
>> Would the regulars who contribute on the wiki consider consider
>> supporting a migration to a git based documentation workflow?
>
>
> I would be fine with such a move.

Me too.

>> I think this would help lower the barrier to contribution by allowing
>> new contributors to submit a pull request or patch for documentation
>> rather than join a mailing list, request access, etc.
>
>
> Agreed. Similar to what we do with t_functional tests.
>>
>>
>> What are the thoughts or concerns about this sort of workflow change?
>>
>>
>>
>>
> all the best
> Christoph
> --
> Christoph Galuschka
> CentOS-QA-Team member | IRC: tigalch
>
> ___
> CentOS-docs mailing list
> CentOS-docs@centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
___
CentOS-docs mailing list
CentOS-docs@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs


Re: [CentOS-docs] status of https://wiki.centos.org/Documentation

2016-03-22 Thread François Cami
On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 10:45 AM, Fabian Arrotin  wrote:
> On 22/03/16 10:21, François Cami wrote:
>> On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 10:12 AM, Manuel Wolfshant
>>  wrote:
>>> On 03/22/2016 09:30 AM, Fabian Arrotin wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I was having a look at that page, and was wondering what we can do for
>>>> point #3 (Manuals and other documentation)
>>>> As we have no real content for CentOS 6 and 7 , my idea was just to
>>>> explain in one line that (while technically not the CentOS
>>>> documentation) , almost all the points coming from uptream documentation
>>>> ( - except for subscription manager - ) can be applied to CentOS and so
>>>> having link from that section to
>>>> https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en/
>>>>
>>>> Ideas, thoughts, comments ?
>>>>
>>> +1 for that. it's long overdue.
>>
>> -1 from me, because access.redhat.com documentation contains support
>> statements which are irrelevant to the CentOS project. I'd very much
>> like to avoid generating (more) confusion in potential users.
>
> Yes, but I was mentioning documentation about how to
> deploy/configure/maintain it, but you have a point : so the note would
> need to mention that everything regarding support channels and
> subscriptions should be considered "not applicable" to CentOS
> It's true that it can confuse potential users, but not having
> documentation at all doesn't help, and from what I see in #centos or
> forums, people are already pointed to the only existing doc, aka the
> upstream ones

My concern is not with users technically savvy enough to connect to
Freenode channels, because these sort-of know the difference between
community projects and enterprise, supported products.

With that said, provided we find a way to mention how to mention that
unambiguously, I'm ok with it.

François
___
CentOS-docs mailing list
CentOS-docs@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs


Re: [CentOS-docs] status of https://wiki.centos.org/Documentation

2016-03-22 Thread François Cami
On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 10:12 AM, Manuel Wolfshant
 wrote:
> On 03/22/2016 09:30 AM, Fabian Arrotin wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I was having a look at that page, and was wondering what we can do for
>> point #3 (Manuals and other documentation)
>> As we have no real content for CentOS 6 and 7 , my idea was just to
>> explain in one line that (while technically not the CentOS
>> documentation) , almost all the points coming from uptream documentation
>> ( - except for subscription manager - ) can be applied to CentOS and so
>> having link from that section to
>> https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en/
>>
>> Ideas, thoughts, comments ?
>>
> +1 for that. it's long overdue.

-1 from me, because access.redhat.com documentation contains support
statements which are irrelevant to the CentOS project. I'd very much
like to avoid generating (more) confusion in potential users.

François
___
CentOS-docs mailing list
CentOS-docs@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs


[CentOS-docs] wiki editing rights request

2016-01-28 Thread François Cami
Hi,

I'd like wiki editing rights to create/update the StorageSIG Ceph pages.

My username is FrançoisCami
and the subject of my future Wiki contributions is going to be Ceph
(what else?).

Proposed locations:
https://wiki.centos.org/Fran%C3%A7oisCami
https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/Storage/
https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/Storage/Ceph
https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/Storage/Ceph/CI
https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/Storage/ceph-Quickstart

Regards,
François
___
CentOS-docs mailing list
CentOS-docs@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs