Hash: SHA512

On 2018-01-11 14:41, Chris Laprise wrote:
> On 01/11/2018 01:16 PM, Unman wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 09:18:46AM +0000, 'Tom Zander' via qubes-users wrote:
>>> On Thursday, 11 January 2018 03:42:11 GMT Andrew David Wong wrote:
>>>> On 2018-01-10 12:53, 'Tom Zander' via qubes-users wrote:
>>>>> I poked the Qubes guys about providing a separate dir on the website to
>>>>> make it clear what is 3.x and what is 4.x specific, but they stated we
>>>>> should instead put notices about exceptions in the document pages.
>>>> That's not exactly right. Please see:
>>> ..
>>>> In other words, do not just add notices in the text about exceptions.
>>>> Instead, make clearly-labeled sections for 3.x and 4.x so that users
>>>> can easily find the right information no matter which version of Qubes
>>>> they're using.
>>>>> So I guess things like ProxyVMs should be mentioned to be old and AppVM
>>>>> is the new.
>>> Ok, I am having problem seeing your solution and my explanation of it as 
>>> any 
>>> different, in practice.
>>> Maybe I'm missing the obvious, I'm just not seeing it.
>>> In this specific case of the VPN page. https://www.qubes-os.org/doc/vpn/
>>> * in v.4 there is no "NetVM".
>>> * There is no "ProxyVM"
>>> * The create qubes screenshot is considerably different.
>>> * adding 'meminfo-writer' and 'network-manager' are not needed (AFAIK).
>>> * does not use iptables anymore.
>>> Ok, going to stop now.  I got to half the page and some 80% of the text and 
>>> screenshots are wrong for v4.
>>> How would you solve that in line with the QubesOS policy?
>> The difference is between this style:
>> You can attach a disk image to a qube using qvm-block :
>> qvm-block -A <target> [qube:]<file> 
>> (This syntax is not available in 4.0)
>> and this:
>> 3.0
>> You can attach a disk image to a qube using qvm-block :
>> qvm-block -A <target> [qube:]<file> 
>> 4.0
>> You cannot attach a disk image to a qube using qvm-block.
>> The advantage of using labelled sections is that it should be easier
>> for users to find the material relevant to the version they are using.
>> Also, that once 3.0 is retired, it will be simple to remove the 3.0
>> relevant material, rather than filleting our bits from each page.
>> On the VPN case your own comment confirms that it would be better to
>> provide a separate section, rather than trying to put "exceptions" in to
>> the existing text.
> At least no section repetition for the scripts should be necessary. But
> doing this for the dialogs still adds a lot to an already long doc.

Is it bad for a doc to be long when it's immediately obvious which
half you can ignore because it's not the version you're using?

> I feel that, apart from making some docs look deceptively long and less
> readable, the most significant downside to melding 3.x/4.x instructions
> together would be to discourage contributions from users. It makes the
> thought of every potential edit seem like a slog through extra markdown,
> and many will think "I don't have time to install 3.2 to write up that
> version".

I don't understand. Why would this be the case? If you want to make a
small edit that pertains only to 4.0, you can simply make that small
edit in the 4.0 section, or add such a section if one doesn't yet
exist, which would only be a few extra characters. A 4.0 user who
wants to add some true fact about 4.0 to the docs doesn't even have to
think about 3.2, much less install it.

- -- 
Andrew David Wong (Axon)
Community Manager, Qubes OS



You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"qubes-users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to qubes-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to qubes-users@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to