Re: gEDA-user: gEDA Wikibook ?
Kai-Martin: Karl Hammar wrote: Contribution is allowed to literally everyone. Click on the edit button and go ahead. ... You have to be online for that. Install mediawiki from your preferred distro and you can edit and render your contribution locally without. In addition, mediawiki allows external text editors. Ok, found it and [1]. It seem to want apache2 and mysql. I don't want to go into that infrastructure for the time beeing, but texinfo also draws with it a big chunk of infrastructure. -- I accept that this is a preference choise, except that texinfo et al. don't need any root-priv. to start/ stop above servers. How do you do the equivalent of git push and pull with mediawiki. I've found [2], is that as robust and well established as git? Or have I got it all wrong? In git there is gaf/docs/wiki/, can the mediawiki content be handled like any plain text file? Mit freudlichen Grüßen /Karl Hammar [1] http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/MediaWiki [2] http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:Importing_XML_dumps - Aspö Data Lilla Aspö 148 S-742 94 Östhammar Schweden +46 173 140 57 ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: gEDA Wikibook ?
On 12/31/2010 05:30 AM, Karl Hammar wrote: can the mediawiki content be handled like any plain text file? That page, http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:Importing_XML_dumps suggests The data is SQL, so you need a database connected with a local install of mediawiki to use it. If you created changes this way, Using mwdumper might let you edit it offline, then run rebuildall.php, which will take a long time, because it has to parse all pages. This is not recommended for large data sets. Just an interpretation, have not done any of this. These kind of wikis are mostly aimed at online editing. John ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: gEDA Wikibook ?
John Griessen wrote: can the mediawiki content be handled like any plain text file? That page, http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:Importing_XML_dumps suggests The data is SQL, You have to differentiate between the article/wikibook and the wiki as a whole. The content of a wikipedia article, wikibook, or whatever, is plain text -- text written in mediawiki syntax. The data base is needed to connect the articles with discussions and old versions. So, if you want to edit a wikibook locally, you'd just transfer a text file. If you want a local copy of the whole wiki, including discussions, versions and all, you'd have to clone the data base hosted at wikimedia.org. so you need a database connected with a local install of mediawiki to use it. If you created changes this way, Using mwdumper might let you edit it offline, The source of the geda/pcb manual is just a single document in mediawiki syntax. I'd recommend to simply copy said source file from the server via the online. Edit locally and paste it back when done. If you really feel the need to see locally, how the changes render, you can paste the source to a local instance of mediawiki. ---)kaimartin(--- -- Kai-Martin Knaak Öffentlicher PGP-Schlüssel: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0x6C0B9F53 ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: gEDA Wikibook ?
On 12/31/2010 10:36 AM, kai-martin knaak wrote: The source of the geda/pcb manual is just a single document in mediawiki syntax. Oh sure, then that would be something to do with git. hadn't realized Karl was referring to that. John ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: gEDA Wikibook ?
Karl Hammar wrote: Contribution is allowed to literally everyone. Click on the edit button and go ahead. ... You have to be online for that. Install mediawiki from your preferred distro and you can edit and render your contribution locally without. In addition, mediawiki allows external text editors. ---)kaimartin(--- -- Kai-Martin Knaak Öffentlicher PGP-Schlüssel: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0x6C0B9F53 ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: gEDA Wikibook ?
On 26 December 2010 02:55, Mark Rages markra...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Dec 25, 2010 at 4:16 PM, John Coppens j...@jcoppens.com wrote: On Fri, 24 Dec 2010 16:20:03 +0100 kai-martin knaak k...@familieknaak.de wrote: It about finding authors. I'm not entirely sure about that. I think there would be persons that would be prepared to produce documents, if there were no necessity to wade through the source code to detect what has to be written about. If it will stop the bikeshedding here, I volunteer to translate a tutorial from crayon-on-napkin into LaTeX or DocBook or whatever. I believe that the author gets to choose the format, not the recipient. Regards, Mark markra...@gmail -- Mark Rages, Engineer Midwest Telecine LLC markra...@midwesttelecine.com ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user I know both, latex and tex. Never use latex even for structured documents (mostly invoices and commercial letters, in my case), but that's another story. In my opinion, while the idea of the wikibook is fine, it's gonna need of constant surveillance which in turn, means a pain in the ass for whoever is at charge. Ideally, all the needed documentation should come together with the software, and ideally, every developer commiting relevant changes, should also pay he's phrase or paragraph to the relevant part of the documentation sources. That way it's always in sync and doesn't become a major problem. As of which format to use, I'd say texinfo. It's easy to learn, has frontends for (at least) help writing documents with emacs (major mode), can be read from the terminal/emacs/vi, it's capable of giving output to html, ps, pdf, etc... I actually hate xml and sgml-alike formats, could never understand how such a stupid and redundant syntax could succeed. Regards, ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: gEDA Wikibook ?
On Sun, Dec 26, 2010 at 4:26 PM, Eduardo Costa ecosta@gmail.com wrote: On 26 December 2010 02:55, Mark Rages markra...@gmail.com wrote: If it will stop the bikeshedding here, I volunteer to translate a tutorial from crayon-on-napkin into LaTeX or DocBook or whatever. I believe that the author gets to choose the format, not the recipient. I know both, latex and tex. Never use latex even for structured documents (mostly invoices and commercial letters, in my case), but that's another story. In my opinion, while the idea of the wikibook is fine, it's gonna need of constant surveillance which in turn, means a pain in the ass for whoever is at charge. *whoosh.* Regards, Mark markra...@gmail -- Mark Rages, Engineer Midwest Telecine LLC markra...@midwesttelecine.com ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: gEDA Wikibook ?
Bob Paddock wrote: How will a human from the Book project know what is and what is not spam in an esoteric area like gEDA/PCB? Some of the authors _with_ background will keep an eye on it. And no, these author are not necessarily us. That's the whole point of the operation: Get more people into the boat! It would not be hard for someone, with no background, to mistake a link to gedasymbols.org as spam link. This would be a false positive. What you worried about above is spam passing undetected. If the humans are us, we still don't need more spam. Again: The wikimedia environment is proven to work. There are several mechanisms that work in concert to provide clean content. Yes, there is no guarantee, but it works. This is similar to linux being free of viruses. The system is not immune per se. But the defense is strong enough to not let the pest crop up. Yes, this works. Did you ever notice any spam on wikipedia? I never did and I use wikipedia a lot. No commercials, either. Have you noticed the recent begging for funds on WikiPedia? Nagging for their own project is no where near to general advertisement. It is not a recent change, either. Every year since 2005 the foundation goes fund raising. ---)kaimartin(--- -- Kai-Martin Knaak Öffentlicher PGP-Schlüssel: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0x6C0B9F53 ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: gEDA Wikibook ?
Stefan Salewski wrote: Not always a low entry barrier is a real benefit. Wikipedia beats each and every encyclopedic dictionary in existance. Nupedia, with the same aim but higher barrier produced less than 100 article were started of which a mere 24 passed the review process in the three years the project lasted. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nupedia In the technical world, there are good reasons for the use of uncommon screws, so that fools can not open dangerous devices. We are not talking about dangerous devices here, but about a manual to a software suite. ---)kaimartin(--- -- Kai-Martin Knaak Öffentlicher PGP-Schlüssel: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0x6C0B9F53 ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: gEDA Wikibook ?
On Sat, 2010-12-25 at 09:50 +0100, kai-martin knaak wrote: Stefan Salewski wrote: Not always a low entry barrier is a real benefit. Wikipedia beats each and every encyclopedic dictionary in existance. Nupedia, with the same aim but higher barrier produced less than 100 article were started of which a mere 24 passed the review process in the three years the project lasted. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nupedia Yes, wikipedia is great, but it is very special. Basically each entry is a own topic, so a single author can work on one entry, without a clue off the rest. Most of the time this works, but still sometimes this leads to redundancy. For writing a book having many authors often is a problem, two or 3 authors can be already to much. Here in germany we use the term many cooks destroy the foot, viele Köche verderben den Brei. When wikipedia started years ago, most access to Internet was possible from universities only, restricting many fools. Today a really large part of new stuff in wikipedia is being deleted soon, for various reasons. That may be necessary to ensure quality standards, but make some authors unhappy. And finally, Wikipedia has very many proofreaders, this ensures quality. For more special wikis things are worse, you can find outdated, wrong and silly entries. ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: gEDA Wikibook ?
John: ... When thinking bout documentation, please do take into account the effort being done by people line Shaun McCance, to create a new help format for gnome. If it was for me, I'd leave out a dependency on gnome. Hopefully the format is text based and there are readers for other widget sets. www.mallardproject.org documents this, and it has some very tempting ... $ host -t ns mallardproject.org Host mallardproject.org not found: 3(NXDOMAIN) A typo? Regards, /Karl Hammar - Aspö Data Lilla Aspö 148 S-742 94 Östhammar Sweden +46 173 140 57 ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: gEDA Wikibook ?
Stefan Salewski: On Fri, 2010-12-24 at 10:43 +0100, Armin Faltl wrote: of making. But why not a real book, that is written in LaTeX? LaTeX is fine for a thesis and text books, with many formulas, intended to be printed and viewed as PDF. For other documentation more versatile formats (with LaTeX backed) are better. ... I've done music scores with Latex and Lilypond, and I usually don't produce pdf's except for others, I'm more at home with postscript; so I claim that your assertion is false. Lilypond itself is using texinfo for documentation though. Regards, /Karl Hammar - Aspö Data Lilla Aspö 148 S-742 94 Östhammar Sweden +46 173 140 57 ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: gEDA Wikibook ?
Russell: ... I don't do latex, because not one sane person on any planet can explain Tex. (yes, i've read all the tex manuals and have written compiler tools) Strange wording. I've not read the tex manuals and I can still produce and be fluent with Latex. About Tex, it's just an old macro processor and as such it has it's drawbacks. The good point (depending of your point of view) about Tex is that it's format is stable, you don't have to relearn every tree years. Regards, /Karl Hammar - Aspö Data Lilla Aspö 148 S-742 94 Östhammar Sweden +46 173 140 57 ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: gEDA Wikibook ?
Kai-Martin: ... I have to agree with timecop on this issue: The problem that needs to be solved, is not connected to the file format. It about finding authors. Yes and no, contributors efforts have to be accepted also as you have mentioned from time to time. This is the big benefit of the wikibook concept. The entry barrier is as low as it can possibly get. Contribution is allowed to literally everyone. Click on the edit button and go ahead. ... You have to be online for that. Please do not develop an environment where you have to be online all the time to be able to contribute. I prefer something where I can develop and review the thing myself off-line. If you go the Latex or texinfo with git route, I'd be willing to contribute. Regards, /Karl Hammar - Aspö Data Lilla Aspö 148 S-742 94 Östhammar Sweden +46 173 140 57 ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: gEDA Wikibook ?
On 26/12/10 01:13, Karl Hammar wrote: Russell: ... I don't do latex, because not one sane person on any planet can explain Tex. (yes, i've read all the tex manuals and have written compiler tools) Strange wording. I've not read the tex manuals and I can still produce and be fluent with Latex. About Tex, it's just an old macro processor and as such it has it's drawbacks. The good point (depending of your point of view) about Tex is that it's format is stable, you don't have to relearn every tree years. Hi, I've written documents with images in Latex. It all seems quite neat on the surface. When you dig down to Tex to try and do something for templates other than book or article, there's no hope in hell in making sense of the incoherent ramblings of all the existing Tex documentation. The most technical terms for the parsing machinery is throat/gullet/stomach. Where is the BNF syntax for the Tex parser, or the list of recognized characters for the recognized keywords? Where is the list of builtin functions for any builtin keywords? ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: gEDA Wikibook ?
Armin: ... I know that a wiki book may have some advantages in the collaboration of making. But why not a real book, that is written in LaTeX? Sending patches for TeX-files or chapters is a very simple process and a pdf-book can be downloaded as a whole and read offline, printed. That's what we try to do now for Varkon Programmers Handbook. Another project with similar tools is Lilypond [1], they use texinfo and git. As such the they can extract documentation from the source code (for it's documentation) and have written documentation. Their output formats is info-file, web/html, pdf/ps. What they have produced is something to aim for. Do we have other good examples of documentation? Regards, /Karl Hammar [1] http://www.lilypond.org/manuals.html - Aspö Data Lilla Aspö 148 S-742 94 Östhammar Sweden +46 173 140 57 ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: gEDA Wikibook ?
On Fri, 24 Dec 2010 16:20:03 +0100 kai-martin knaak k...@familieknaak.de wrote: It about finding authors. I'm not entirely sure about that. I think there would be persons that would be prepared to produce documents, if there were no necessity to wade through the source code to detect what has to be written about. Even if the source code has excellent comments included, few people will volunteer for the task if the it isn't clear what has to be done. That is not unsimilar to writing code for a client - the work is not writing the code. It is getting reliable specs from him/her. John ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: gEDA Wikibook ?
On Sat, Dec 25, 2010 at 4:16 PM, John Coppens j...@jcoppens.com wrote: On Fri, 24 Dec 2010 16:20:03 +0100 kai-martin knaak k...@familieknaak.de wrote: It about finding authors. I'm not entirely sure about that. I think there would be persons that would be prepared to produce documents, if there were no necessity to wade through the source code to detect what has to be written about. If it will stop the bikeshedding here, I volunteer to translate a tutorial from crayon-on-napkin into LaTeX or DocBook or whatever. I believe that the author gets to choose the format, not the recipient. Regards, Mark markra...@gmail -- Mark Rages, Engineer Midwest Telecine LLC markra...@midwesttelecine.com ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: gEDA Wikibook ?
kai-martin knaak wrote: Thank you for describing the available documents so compact. What is missing in this picture? IMHO, it is a manual on how to use the tools in concert. The best approximation so far is the tutorial by Bill Wilson. But as it is a beginners tutorial, it does not attempt to cover more advanced tips and tricks. I envision this as the topic a wikibook: A user manual to the complete suite of tools. I know that a wiki book may have some advantages in the collaboration of making. But why not a real book, that is written in LaTeX? Sending patches for TeX-files or chapters is a very simple process and a pdf-book can be downloaded as a whole and read offline, printed. That's what we try to do now for Varkon Programmers Handbook. ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: gEDA Wikibook ?
But why not a real book, that is written in LaTeX? Because you just ruled out the remaining 1% of people who even wanted to help with writing any kinda documentation. ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: gEDA Wikibook ?
On Friday 24 December 2010 10:12:42 timecop wrote: But why not a real book, that is written in LaTeX? Because you just ruled out the remaining 1% of people who even wanted to help with writing any kinda documentation. Wrong. I much prefer writing LaTeX to writing wiki syntax. Also, diagrams are so much nicer (thank you TikZ!) Peter -- Peter Brett pe...@peter-b.co.uk Remote Sensing Research Group Surrey Space Centre signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: gEDA Wikibook ?
Den 2010-12-24 10:43:34 skrev Armin Faltl armin.fa...@aon.at: kai-martin knaak wrote: Thank you for describing the available documents so compact. What is missing in this picture? IMHO, it is a manual on how to use the tools in concert. The best approximation so far is the tutorial by Bill Wilson. But as it is a beginners tutorial, it does not attempt to cover more advanced tips and tricks. I envision this as the topic a wikibook: A user manual to the complete suite of tools. I know that a wiki book may have some advantages in the collaboration of making. But why not a real book, that is written in LaTeX? Exactly why is it important with what it is written? Sending patches for TeX-files or chapters is a very simple process and a pdf-book can be downloaded as a whole and read offline, printed. That's what we try to do now for Varkon Programmers Handbook. -- Kind regards Johnny Rosenberg ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: gEDA Wikibook ?
Den 2010-12-24 11:23:35 skrev Peter TB Brett pe...@peter-b.co.uk: On Friday 24 December 2010 10:12:42 timecop wrote: But why not a real book, that is written in LaTeX? Because you just ruled out the remaining 1% of people who even wanted to help with writing any kinda documentation. Wrong. I much prefer writing LaTeX to writing wiki syntax. Also, diagrams are so much nicer (thank you TikZ!) Peter So you are the ”1% of people who even wanted to help with writing any kinda documentation”? Sorry, I didn't know that. -- Kind regards Johnny Rosenberg ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: gEDA Wikibook ?
Armin Faltl wrote: I know that a wiki book may have some advantages in the collaboration of making. But why not a real book, that is written in LaTeX? Because wikimedia provides the lowest entry barrier available. Both, in terms of technology and in terms of sociology. Sending patches for TeX-files or chapters is a very simple process It is much less simple than a click on the edit button. and a pdf-book can be downloaded as a whole and read offline, printed. wikibooks can be downloaded, printed and read offline. ---)kaimartin(--- -- Kai-Martin Knaak Öffentlicher PGP-Schlüssel: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0x6C0B9F53 ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: gEDA Wikibook ?
On Fri, 24 Dec 2010 10:43:34 +0100 Armin Faltl armin.fa...@aon.at wrote: I know that a wiki book may have some advantages in the collaboration of making. But why not a real book, that is written in LaTeX? When thinking bout documentation, please do take into account the effort being done by people line Shaun McCance, to create a new help format for gnome. www.mallardproject.org documents this, and it has some very tempting features, such as reverse linking. Also, it seems to be the preferred help format for gtk+-3.0, and has been integrated into the new help system 'yelp' which is quite a step forward. I'm only just starting to learn how to write in it. John ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: gEDA Wikibook ?
snip I think you guys are all missing the point. The problem isn't 74239847 tools to write the docs in. The problem is nobody wants to write them even if you have the best tools. ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: gEDA Wikibook ?
John Coppens wrote: I know that a wiki book may have some advantages in the collaboration of making. But why not a real book, that is written in LaTeX? When thinking bout documentation, please do take into account the effort being done by people line Shaun McCance, to create a new help format for gnome. I have to agree with timecop on this issue: The problem that needs to be solved, is not connected to the file format. It about finding authors. This is the big benefit of the wikibook concept. The entry barrier is as low as it can possibly get. Contribution is allowed to literally everyone. Click on the edit button and go ahead. Not even login with a fake name necessary. Wikimedia provides an environment where this approach works. ---)kaimartin(-- -- Kai-Martin Knaak Öffentlicher PGP-Schlüssel: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0x6C0B9F53 ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: gEDA Wikibook ?
Not even login with a fake name necessary. Sounds like a new Spam portal. That we don't need. -- http://blog.softwaresafety.net/ http://www.designer-iii.com/ http://www.wearablesmartsensors.com/ ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: gEDA Wikibook ?
www.mallardproject.org documents this, http://projectmallard.org/ I believe is the correct link. ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: gEDA Wikibook ?
Bob Paddock wrote: Not even login with a fake name necessary. Sounds like a new Spam portal. That we don't need. A wikibook project is hosted by the wikimedia foundation. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikibooks and http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Main_Page Do it is technologically separated from the geda websites. Spam prevention by human watchdogs is part of the package. Yes, this works. Did you ever notice any spam on wikipedia? I never did and I use wikipedia a lot. No commercials, either. The content is free and open as in open source software. ---)kaimartin(--- -- Kai-Martin Knaak Öffentlicher PGP-Schlüssel: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0x6C0B9F53 ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: gEDA Wikibook ?
On Fri, Dec 24, 2010 at 11:27 AM, kai-martin knaak k...@familieknaak.de wrote: Bob Paddock wrote: Not even login with a fake name necessary. Sounds like a new Spam portal. That we don't need. Spam prevention by human watchdogs is part of the package. How will a human from the Book project know what is and what is not spam in an esoteric area like gEDA/PCB? It would not be hard for someone, with no background, to mistake a link to gedasymbols.org as spam link. If the humans are us, we still don't need more spam. Yes, this works. Did you ever notice any spam on wikipedia? I never did and I use wikipedia a lot. No commercials, either. Have you noticed the recent begging for funds on WikiPedia? ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: gEDA Wikibook ?
On Fri, 2010-12-24 at 16:20 +0100, kai-martin knaak wrote: I have to agree with timecop on this issue: The problem that needs to be solved, is not connected to the file format. It about finding authors. This is the big benefit of the wikibook concept. The entry barrier is as low as it can possibly get. Contribution is allowed to literally everyone. Click on the edit button and go ahead. Not even login with a fake name necessary. Wikimedia provides an environment where this approach works. ---)kaimartin(-- Not always a low entry barrier is a real benefit. In the technical world, there are good reasons for the use of uncommon screws, so that fools can not open dangerous devices. In the Internet world: Nearly all people now have access to information, this is great. But so many seems to think that they have to add silly content everywhere -- newsgroups, Internet platforms, blogs, facebook, all filled with silly stupid stuff, the same questions and comments again and again, more than one typo in each line, written without any grammar from people without real names. I really try to get not in close contact with all that dirt, but sometimes you have a problem which wikipedia can not explain, you have to do a google search and gets all that dirt before useful content. Often I have seen people new to a project, they were exited and started a tutorial about that... Some weeks later they discovered how much work it is, they stop working on it, but often the pages with headlines but no contents remain for years in the net. But my conclusion is not, that a fully open wiki is a bad idea for gEDA -- I am not sure. ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: gEDA Wikibook ? (was: Toporouter crashing in GIThead on seemingly simple circuits)
Hi KMK, -Original Message- From: geda-user-boun...@moria.seul.org [mailto:geda-user-boun...@moria.seul.org] On Behalf Of kai-martin knaak Sent: Thursday, December 23, 2010 1:08 PM To: geda-u...@seul.org Subject: Re: gEDA-user: gEDA Wikibook ? (was: Toporouter crashing in GIThead on seemingly simple circuits) Bert Timmerman wrote: Why not create a wikibook ? Great idea! I am in for starting such a book. Also count me in for tips and tricks of wikipedia formating. My other computer activity is the physics department in German wikipedia... Of course, a wikibook can't replace the pcb manual. Important parts of the manual are automatically derived from source comments. ---)kaimartin(--- -- Kai-Martin Knaak Öffentlicher PGP-Schlüssel: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0x6C0B9F53 Just MHO I don't think it's a Good Thing (TM) that a User Manual is derived from source code files, for this would require a person with gEDA-dev priviliges to push changes into the git repository. This workflow raises the threshold to contribute to user documentation and adds to the burden of the gEDA-devs (they have ample time for reviewing patches). In the past we have __had__ an experiment with noweb for gaf (past tense for good reasons), I'd rather keep things simple. If documentation needs to be generated from source code files let it just be (API reference) docs for (future/newbie) gEDA-devs and use Doxygen in pcb too (for obvious reasons). /MHO Kind regards, Bert Timmerman. ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: gEDA Wikibook ? (was: Toporouter crashing in GIThead on seemingly simple circuits)
Bert Timmerman bert.timmer...@xs4all.nl writes: I don't think it's a Good Thing (TM) that a User Manual is derived from source code files, for this would require a person with gEDA-dev priviliges to push changes into the git repository. I originally envisioned four manuals for PCB: http://www.delorie.com/pcb/docs/ The first two obviously must be hand-written; a wikibook would be appropriate for those (although I already wrote the first). The second two are more likely to benefit from source extraction and tighter control. I don't mind giving push privs to doc maintainers. ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: gEDA Wikibook ?
DJ Delorie d...@delorie.com writes: Bert Timmerman bert.timmer...@xs4all.nl writes: I don't think it's a Good Thing (TM) that a User Manual is derived from source code files, for this would require a person with gEDA-dev priviliges to push changes into the git repository. I originally envisioned four manuals for PCB: http://www.delorie.com/pcb/docs/ The first two obviously must be hand-written; a wikibook would be appropriate for those (although I already wrote the first). The second two are more likely to benefit from source extraction and tighter control. I don't mind giving push privs to doc maintainers. Documentation of gEDA, including PCB is a huge mess, with lots of diverging efforts being attempted, but no results that I could point to. The fakt that there were three PCB FAQs highlights this nicely. And telling somebody to read the FAQ, when google first shows the two that do not provide the answer makes it much worse. There is the gEDA wiki, without an EDIT button, not even a REGISTER button, and when you click on View Source, it says This page is read only. You can view the source, but not change it. Ask your administrator if you think this is wrong. without pointing to said adminstrator. That won't do. Sure, eventually I found the last paragraph on the front page to explain why it is so. Anyhow, I guess I will continuie to ignore that wiki, which is not a wiki in my eyes without an edit button. The barrier to contribute not only source code but also documentation is too high. There are way too may forks and branches around. I will not help to start even more manuals, wikibooks, whatever, without a coherent plan, which includes taking all the other stuff offline eventually. -- Stephan ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: gEDA Wikibook ?
On Thu, 2010-12-23 at 16:32 +0100, Stephan Boettcher wrote: Documentation of gEDA, including PCB is a huge mess, [...] Indeed, I fully agree in my heart, but I have at least two good reasons why I do not call it loud: - It will discourage people to contribute - I respect the people who wrote something - I have done no contribution myself And, there is at least some fine documentation, DJs beginner Tutorial! Maybe one problem is, that most of the docs are owned by Ales, who has retired long time ago. Maybe a new platform with free access would be fine? Personally I do not think that different people can contribute really high quality documentation at all -- stupid people will contribute silly stuff, verbosity and redundancy may occur, outdated stuff will persist. But on the other hand, it is clear that a single person or small group can not do the large effort to write high quality gEDA/PCB documentation. ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: gEDA Wikibook ? (was: Toporouter crashing in GIThead on seemingly simple circuits)
Bert Timmerman wrote: I don't think it's a Good Thing (TM) that a User Manual is derived from source code files, for this would require a person with gEDA-dev priviliges to push changes into the git repository. Fair enough. Anyway, the current situation is like this: pcb: The distribution contains a manual which relies heavily on source code supplied content (actions). It is written in texinfo format. The manual is mainly organized as a reference to the functions of pcb. There is a fairly comprehensive manual on footprint generation written by Stephen Meier and Stuart Brorson. DJ Delorie recently wrote a turorial on how to get started with pcb. gschem: A user guide in the dokuwiki at gpleda. This guide goes through the parts of the GUI and describes what they do. Except for some more recent features, this it seems fairly up to date. There is no much info on guile. Interaction with pcb and simulation tools is mentioned but not elaborated. xgsch2pcb is not mentioned at all. There much less HOWTO information than I would expect from a complete user manual. gnetlist: There is a user guide in the wiki. Some information is out of date. For example, according to the guide all symbols must contain a device attribute. Some important aspects like hierarchy support and specific backend info are not covered at all. There is some backend information scattered among READMEs, though. gnucap and ngspice: Their distribution comes with comprehensive manuals in PDF format -- literally hundreds of pages. I can't say much about the content because I still have not used these simulators for real projects. Both manuals are not specific to gschem. There is a HOWTO in the wiki written by Stuart Brorson which covers the use of ngspice with gschem. Icarus Verilog: I can't comment on this since I have never been close to design FPGAs and the like. other geda tools (gerbv, gattrib, wcalc, mcalc, GTKWave): No manuals, just man pages and READMEs. What is missing in this picture? IMHO, it is a manual on how to use the tools in concert. The best approximation so far is the tutorial by Bill Wilson. But as it is a beginners tutorial, it does not attempt to cover more advanced tips and tricks. I envision this as the topic a wikibook: A user manual to the complete suite of tools. ---)kaimartin(--- -- Kai-Martin Knaak Öffentlicher PGP-Schlüssel: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0x6C0B9F53 ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
