[Qgis-community-team] 2.18 LTR Documentation

[Alexandre Neto]

I also have work to do on the screenshots. I am currently updating
processing and there are many figures that must be replaced, and maybe some
text.

I am going to take care of it before the deadline.
A sex, 16/06/2017, 09:52, Yves Jacolin <yjacolin at free.fr> escreveu:

> Harrissou,
>
> I agreed with 1st of july for release. I will work on my last pending issue
> and work on another one next week.
>
> I will finish the review of your PR next week.
>
> Y.
> On jeudi 15 juin 2017 21:17:13 CEST DelazJ wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > For deadline, I propose to release it as soon as 2.18 is officially LTR
> > (this is what we did (or tried?) for 2.14). The LTR status was supposed
> to
> > be in may according to online roadmap but I didn't see any official
> message
> > so I guess it has been postponed to june (ie, 23/06) so a week later, 1st
> > of July (to keep Alexandre July proposal :) ) might be good. Would that
> > planning be fine for you? Richard?
> > Btw, last PSC meeting minutes are missing at
> > https://github.com/qgis/QGIS/wiki#psc-meeting-minutes. PSC, could that
> be
> > fixed, please? Thanks.
> >
> > Alexandre, I agree with most of your points:
> > * keep on prioritizing User manual update despite(/because of?) the
> > desperate and demotivating lack of contributors (we don't only need
> > writers, we also need readers, reviewers to help fix typo, give their
> > opinions on pull requests or issues...);
> > * let the obsolete PyQGIS Cookbook to devs (or new writers, if ever) and
> > Training manual to trainers;
> > * prioritize the doc infrastructure update. Richard, any news on this?
> >
> > About the 2.18 doc release (we still have 2 weeks before deadline, if
> > agreed), I'd however like to have the pending PRs merged. I have some I
> > should complete and others that need feedbacks. This includes the
> > restructuring PR which imho could easily allow to later backport fixes
> for
> > some remaining 2.18 issues. Also, while restructuring those chapters is
> not
> > a high priority (for 2.18), I consider it like a good step to ensure a
> > better user experience: a use case I have in mind is eg, to configure the
> > 2.18 localized doc as the default doc for QGIS 3 so one could access
> > localized documentation from the application instead of testing (English
> > only) doc. And due to the current implementation using full hyperlink,
> > sharing the same structure than testing doc is needed to guarantee it
> > succeeds.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Harrissou
> >
> > 2017-06-15 11:30 GMT+02:00 Yves Jacolin <yjacolin at free.fr>:
> > > Alexandre,
> > >
> > > On mercredi 14 juin 2017 23:05:49 CEST Alexandre Neto wrote:
> > > > Harrissou et al.,
> > > >
> > > > Sorry for the silence, but this threads are so big that I never find
> >
> > time
> >
> > > > to read and answer properly.
> > > >
> > > > Harrissou, thanks for gathering all that ideas and TODOs. Most of
> them
> >
> > are
> >
> > > > in fact very important for 3.x (I dare to say 3.2 as I don't think we
> > > > should do an official doc release for 3.0).
> > > >
> > > > Our biggest problem is (still) not having enough human power. We are
> >
> > barely
> >
> > > > able to keep the User's Manual updated on time. Training manual
> >
> > probably is
> >
> > > > few versions behind and PyQGIS cook book I have no idea. So, IMHO, we
> > > > should focus our efforts on what's more important. And for me it's
> the
> >
> > User
> >
> > > > manual. Which I consider to be mandatory to deliver. The other two
> are
> >
> > nice
> >
> > > > to have. For the cook book we need developers to take care of it, and
> >
> > the
> >
> > > > training, we need trainers (people o rely on it to give training) to
> >
> > take
> >
> > > > care of it.
> > > >
> > > > I say we should not ambiss to change 2.18 structure. Nor to make it
> > > > perfect. I would vote for setting a deadline and release the docs,
> even
> >
> > if
> >
> > > > something was not completed. July would be ok for me.
> > > >
> > > > From that point on, we can focus on 3.x users manual and all the
> > > > improvements we would like to do. Planning the docs Restructuring
> would
> >
> > be
> >
> > > > my top priority as we might not be  able to do it again soon (to not
> >
> > break
> >
> > > > help links).
> > > >
> > > > My second priority would go to update the sphinx / bootstrap etc
> >
> > versions.
> >
> > > > Assuming that all tasks make sense, before even go to the PSC, I
> would
> >
> > add
> >
> > > > a column with the needed (human) resources for each task. That will
> > > > probably determine what is going forward and what is not.
> > > >
> > > > I would not rush in converting the tasks into github issues for now.
> a
> >
> > wiki
> >
> > > > or Google Doc may be more practical as we can see the all picture
> >
> > easily.
> >
> > > > And we can elaborate a final document to send to others.
> > >
> > > I agree with all above except this part: I am not sure that a wiki or
> >
> > Google
> >
> > > doc will give you a nice picture of task to do. We can filter issue
> >
> > easily in
> >
> > > "project" and/or milestone.
> > >
> > > Y.
>
> --
Alexandre Neto
---------------------
@AlexNetoGeo
http://sigsemgrilhetas.wordpress.com
http://gisunchained.wordpress.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-community-team/attachments/20170617/e79ee072/attachment.html>