On Mon, 7 Feb 2011 12:21:00 +1000 Russell Dickenson <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> The question is: in what format would people like to see the > >> newsletter published? The Ubuntu newsletter is published as a > >> weekly email, for example. The Frugalware Linux newsletter is > >> published on a web site in HTML format. Personally I would prefer > >> that the newsletter's content be hosted on a web site instead of > >> sent out via email. The hosted method makes it easier to correct > >> errors which may occur occasionally. Of course we could announce > >> the latest newsletter in the usual Geany ML(s). > > > > +1 for website, then I can't delete it and an archive can be kept in > > case it contains stuff that lasts beyond this month. > > Thanks. I guess depending on the markup language we are choosing in the end, generating a HTML with some nice cc should be the smallest issue as nearly all of them do support such thing. > > Which actually would be a good idea, Geany has a fair bit of > > "hidden" functionality and a "function of the month" exposing > > functions of Geany that people tend to forget would be good, I know > > I keep (re)learning new shortcuts. > > > > And a "Plugin of the month" too :-) > > I agree. A feature/plugin focus of the month would be useful. I know > that it takes me a while to get to know an application like Geany > well. Focusing on a particular feature would make the learning process > easier for people like me. As someone who likes to tweak configuration > settings, hints on these topics would also be useful I believe. In fact this is a nice idea. I'm asking who like to take over this task and provide something like this on a monthly basis for the newsletter? > >>> Right now I started to put some content together into a LaTeX-file > >>> which will be compiled to PDF and plain text and send out later > >>> once its done. > >> > >> Would you mind sending the finished product to me? > >> > >> A question to Frank and others - do you mind in what format the > >> newsletter's content is written in? I only have experience in using > >> HTML and AsciiDoc (http://www.methods.co.nz/asciidoc/). I would > >> *much* prefer to use AsciiDoc because it "is a text document > >> format for writing notes, documentation, articles, books, ebooks, > >> slideshows, web pages, man pages and blogs. AsciiDoc files can be > >> translated to many formats including HTML, PDF, EPUB, man page." I > >> know that there are similar tools such as "plain text" markup > >> languages but AsciiDoc is the one with which I have most > >> experience. > > > > -1 for Latex, I know Frank is a Latexpert but they are a bit thin on > > the ground, so having to do contributions in Latex would be limiting > > (or would require Frank to do lots of conversion, and we want him to > > have more time for other things :-). > > Yes. Sorry, but I not likely to contribute if I have to learn > something like Latex. It's not something I'm using now, nor likely to > use any time in the near future so I'm simply not motivated to learn > it. I don't care much about the markup language. LaTeX on our level is not more complicated as writing ReST etc. I guess. > > As an occasional Asciidoc contributor I hate to say this but... > > > > Perhaps the project should stick to one markup language? Geany's > > documentation is done in reST, a part of Python's docutils which is > > used to produce the Python docs. > > (see http://docs.python.org/documenting/index.html ). > > reST is a "lightweight markup language" quite similar to Asciidoc > > and as you can see from the Geany help file produces HTML (and > > others too IIRC). > > That's the one I was trying to think of! Thanks, Lex, for reminding > me. I included AsciiDoc only as an example. I don't want to complicate > things too much so would be happy to use reST. I currently use > AsciiDoc for other projects but I see no reason to try to force it > upon other people when a similar tool is already in use and doing its > job well. OK. Let's give ReST a try. I guess we will need to have a makefile which is generating the output we need. Who likes to do this? Also I think this should be done after volume 1 has been send to public. > >> Assuming we were using AsciiDoc, we could have a master document > >> which then draws in content from various contributors and is then > >> converted to various formats. This method would make the job of > >> the newsletter's editor a little easier since each piece can be > >> edited separately, then combined into one document. > > > > Anything that simplifies the process is good if it reduces the time > > required of the editor and contributors. This leads to more > > contributions and more regular publication. > > I'll look into options available via reST. Even if it doesn't offer a > "master document" option natively, I'm sure a custom solution could > easily be created. As mentioned: With usage of git there is no real need to have such thing like a master document as its possible to edit without having unsolvable conflicts. Cheers, Frank -- http://frank.uvena.de/en/
pgpWPD45Yz0rD.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Geany mailing list [email protected] http://lists.uvena.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geany
