[Geomoose-users] 2.6 - To Doc? To Purge? To Release?

[Matej Mailing]

Just a little note:
on http://www.geomoose.org/trunk/ at the announcement of 2.6 RC1 the year
is wrong (2011 instead of 2012).
4/13/2011 - GeoMOOSE 2.6 RC1 Available Now
BR, Matej


2012/4/12 Bob Basques <Bob.Basques at ci.stpaul.mn.us>

>  Eli,
>
>  It's all good stuff.  Even me learning a new thing or two (whether I
> like it not) about sphinx.
>
>  bobb
>
>
>
> >>> Eli Adam <eadam at co.lincoln.or.us> wrote:
>
> bobb,
>
> Hopefully the online validator would work well enough to avoid bad stuff.
> If you want to attach to a ticket I will gladly apply it. If you want, I
> can try to help you get sphinx running in your local environment so that
> you can run locally.
>
> I'm not opposed to you committing it and breaking rendering things and
> then me fixing it after you, so long as you were reasonably confident that
> your changes weren't going to break things (which perhaps an online
> validator would do) and/or you promptly check your commits online and
> revert them if they cause problems. However, such a thing should be rare
> (perhaps use two online validators if using one in the past didn't work).
> Also, other people may feel differently about commits breaking rendering
> things. I also can't speak for the infrastructure. If your changes were
> enough to impact the infrastructure, I can imagine that would be unpopular.
>
> I'm sure that we can work something out.
>
> Bests, Eli
>
>   On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 10:38 AM, Bob Basques <
> Bob.Basques at ci.stpaul.mn.us> wrote:
>
>>  All,
>>
>>
>>  Ok, last time I tried this, I did the Sphinx stuff by hand and
>> validated it online with a SPHINX validator and then posted. Apparently
>> this was bad, since I got thrown out of documentation class as a
>> consequence. See my remark about not being afraid of writing doc's but
>> being told I did it wrong.
>>
>>
>>  . . . .
>>
>>
>>  bobb
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >>> Eli Adam <eadam at co.lincoln.or.us> wrote:
>>
>>   Ed and Bob (Bistrais in addition to bobb), Dan, and all,
>>
>> Thanks for volunteering with documentation writing. The docs are
>> generated using sphinx (http://sphinx.pocoo.org/) which just uses
>> restructured text which is fairly simple txt files. You can look at
>> them here,
>> http://trac.osgeo.org/geomoose/browser/geomoose2/trunk/sphinx-docs/source
>> Also, anywhere on the website you can click the 'Show Source' link
>> under 'This Page'. Looking at and mimicking the existing files works
>> fairly well for me.
>>
>> The general workflow for writing docs is to svn checkout/update, write
>> the documentation locally, have sphinx installed and locally build
>> the documentation, check that it is all correct, create a patch and
>> attach to a ticket (http://trac.osgeo.org/geomoose/report) or svn
>> commit, the website will reflect your changes 15 minutes or so after
>> it is committed.
>>
>> If you want to use that workflow, I'm available to help offline to get
>> subversion and sphinx set up in your environment. If you don't want
>> to use that workflow, then you can open tickets and just put the
>> documentation in the ticket and I will convert it to the correct
>> format and get it on the website.
>>
>> > Does anyone have an objection to cleaning up the docs to *only* apply to
>> > 2.6? My motivation is clarity. 2.6 simplifies installation quite a bit
>> but
>> > it also deprecates a few functions and I'd rather not have too much
>> "diff
>> > docing" going on as it can confuse new users.
>>
>> I thought about this last night as I added strike through to some
>> changed items. I'm all for changing trunk and the 2.6 branch to match
>> those realities. Previous versions of documentation can live in their
>> own branches, I think that dedicated version specific documentation is
>> far better than 'diff docing'.
>>
>> Looking forward to it, Eli
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Geomoose-users mailing list
>> Geomoose-users at lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-users
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Geomoose-users mailing list
> Geomoose-users at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-users
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/geomoose-users/attachments/20120414/27879773/attachment.html