I was thinking the same thing because I'd probably be doing the same thing.
I think docs committed to SVN is the only feasible way. You also get branch, merge and patch support for free with subversion. On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 12:30 AM, Markus Zywitza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > How would that play with offline editing. I'm writing much of my docs in > public transport far away from any internet access... > > -Markus > > 2008/10/31 petemounce <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >> There's actually a Drupal module for export-book-to-docbook, I believe >> (I've read about it, not used it). If you have a look at >> http://dev.dejardin.org/documentation at the Spark docs, that's an >> example of the Spark documentation online in its Drupal instance. >> Drupal has quite a configurable workflow so changes could be moderated >> online, and rolled back if required. If the export to docbook works, >> it seems like we would achieve both the "easy to contribute" goal and >> the "easy to publish to variety of formats" goal? It would also (I >> guess again in theory) mitigate the need for XML editing. We would >> also be able to source-control the exports if we wanted to, of course. >> >> Having just typed that, it does sound a bit too good to be true. >> Would people like me to throw together a Drupal instance for this over >> the weekend and make it available to try out? >> >> Regards >> Pete >> >> >> On Oct 31, 1:59 pm, Bill Barry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > I guess I wasn't clear at all about what I would rather: I'd very much >> > want to contribute patches to something stored in the repo and have the >> > online stuff generated than have to deal with making changes directly >> > online. One of the problems with doing the documentation online is that >> > we would lose the ability to reject changes and instead would need to >> > undo them after the fact. >> > >> > Richard Fleming wrote: >> > > A quick google search (online docbook editor) shows that there looks >> > > to be projects around that combine "wiki style" websites with docbook >> > > generators, which may provide an easy way to maintain docbook stored >> > > documentation. I know there are some decent offline tools for docbook >> > > also, I've used lyx which is a WYSIWYG editor for structured editing, >> > > although editing the raw files might be clean as well. >> > >> > > Keep in mind I haven't used any of these before, so I don't have >> > > anything valuable to say about the projects found :). >> > >> > > Thanks, >> > > Rick Fleming >> > >> > > On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 8:28 AM, Bill Barry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >> > >> > >> I am not very familiar with docbook docs (other than reading them), >> but >> > >> I really do like the output. Would it be written in the repo and the >> > >> sites generated or would it be some sort of collaborative online >> thing? >> > >> > >> Jonathon Rossi wrote: >> > >> > >>> While everyone is on the topic of change, do we want to move to the >> > >>> docbook documentation that Symon Rottem set up a while back? It >> should >> > >>> make it easier to write documentation. >> > >> > >>> Do we really need multiple copies of the documentation hosted like >> we >> > >>> have now? Because documentation tends to lag behind and is always >> > >>> being updated after a release it might be better to have one copy >> like >> > >>> jQuery has. >> > >> > >>> MonoRail example of the docbook format: >> > >>>http://www.symbiotic-development.com/monorail/html/index.html >> > >> > >>> -- >> > >>> Jonathon Rossi >> >> > > > > -- Jonathon Rossi --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Castle Project Development List" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/castle-project-devel?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
