This is, indeed, great news.
I like it for two reasons particularly (though not only). The way Liane is
setting it up and the makefile may help me with some of the errors I've been
getting, and SMF is one of those things I just haven't gotten my head around
well. (Yes, one day I'll have time to read the FAQ that was put together; I was
one of the people that asked if it could be written.) So, both the docs and the
methodology will be useful to me.
I would maybe just adjust the outline it like so:
> > 0. License
> > 1. Documentation Format/Standa
2. Documentation Tools
> > 2.1 Required Documentation Tools
2.2 Recommended Documentation Tools
> > 3. Documentation Instructions
> > 3.1. Special instructions
> > 4. Contributing
So, "you can't go forward without tools x, and tools y may be nice to have but
not fundamental". Of course, 2.1 and 2.2 could be collapsed or "rolled up" if
there are no optional tools to suggest.
> Very, actually. Makes me realize that I never
> actually mentioned
> that this is a docbook5 book. :)
That's good to know. The docs I've been playing with don't all say they are
docbook5, yet Michelle's comments suggest they are. So, I've actually been
using the docbook4 and 5 materials, depending, just to see what happens.
> In general, it'd be *really* cool if the pieces of
> software I
> listed as required tools were simply included in one
> of the OpenSolaris
> consolidations.
I would definitely +1 that! While I've been using S10U3, knowing the tools were
in the OpenSolaris consolidations, and just work, would be a strong incentive
for me to get off my butt and build my SunRay server using mirrored drives
running OpenSolaris. (I've mentioned before that the man page for Sol10U3
xsltproc isn't for the version of the command packaged with the OS. While that
hasn't been enough of an incentive, your wish being fulfilled would be.)
> I've been trying to get around to
> doing at least
> a Companion
> (http://opensolaris.org/os/project/companion/)
> integration,
> if not just an SFW
> (http://opensolaris.org/os/project/sfwnv/)
> integration... but, can't seem to find the time. If
> someone wanted to
> do so, it'd be a big help in moving similar projects
> forward.
I would love to help, but as Michelle can attest, lately I've been moving one
step forward, two steps back. The vultures start circling the moment it looks
like I may have two minutes free. :-(
> > Should it be sponsored(or co-sponsored) by the
> documentation community?
I'm glad Michelle has already done so, even though I guess it wasn't strictly
required (yay, Michelle!).
Thanks, Liane (and Michelle) for the hard work in getting this out. If there is
some way I can help with what limited time I have, please feel free to ping me.
Rainer
(BTW, we met at LISA 2005, in San Diego. I doubt you remember the bald guy with
the raspy voice, though. :-) )
This message posted from opensolaris.org
