References to my.gnus.org/FAQ

References to my.gnus.org/FAQ

[Tim Landscheidt]

Hi,

there are some references to (dead for some time now)
my.gnus.org as the source of the FAQ and to a rather life-
less repository at Sourceforge in texi/gnus-faq.texi. Any
suggestions on how to clean this up?

Tim

Re: References to my.gnus.org/FAQ

[Ted Zlatanov]

On Wed, 02 Jun 2010 23:47:27 +0000 Tim Landscheidt <tim@tim-landscheidt.de> wrote: 

TL> there are some references to (dead for some time now)
TL> my.gnus.org as the source of the FAQ and to a rather life-
TL> less repository at Sourceforge in texi/gnus-faq.texi. Any
TL> suggestions on how to clean this up?

I'm in favor of removing those references and pointing people to the
Emacs Wiki and git.gnus.org instead.

Ted

Re: References to my.gnus.org/FAQ

[Tim Landscheidt]

Ted Zlatanov <tzz@lifelogs.com> wrote:

> TL> there are some references to (dead for some time now)
> TL> my.gnus.org as the source of the FAQ and to a rather life-
> TL> less repository at Sourceforge in texi/gnus-faq.texi. Any
> TL> suggestions on how to clean this up?

> I'm in favor of removing those references and pointing people to the
> Emacs Wiki and git.gnus.org instead.

What about the format and the history? Apparently,
gnus-faq.texi was generated from the Docbook source at
<URI:http://gnus.cvs.sourceforge.net/viewvc/gnus/gnus-faq/>.
Do we maintain the master source as XML, or has texinfo all
the output formats we need? (Info? HTML? PDF?)

  How do we properly attribute the previous contributors?
<URI:http://gnus.cvs.sourceforge.net/viewvc/gnus/gnus-faq/src/gnus-faq.xml?view=log>
shows about 50 revisions; can they be imported into the Git
repository in a meaningful way? Otherwise, is it okay/enough
to just make sure that the authors are listed in
gnus-faq.texi and take it from there? (With my mind set to
Wikipedia mode, I'm a bit overcautious in this regard :-).)

Tim

Re: References to my.gnus.org/FAQ

[Ted Zlatanov]

On Wed, 09 Jun 2010 23:52:13 +0000 Tim Landscheidt <tim@tim-landscheidt.de> wrote: 

TL> Ted Zlatanov <tzz@lifelogs.com> wrote:
TL> there are some references to (dead for some time now)
TL> my.gnus.org as the source of the FAQ and to a rather life-
TL> less repository at Sourceforge in texi/gnus-faq.texi. Any
TL> suggestions on how to clean this up?

>> I'm in favor of removing those references and pointing people to the
>> Emacs Wiki and git.gnus.org instead.

TL> What about the format and the history? Apparently,
TL> gnus-faq.texi was generated from the Docbook source at
TL> <URI:http://gnus.cvs.sourceforge.net/viewvc/gnus/gnus-faq/>.
TL> Do we maintain the master source as XML, or has texinfo all
TL> the output formats we need? (Info? HTML? PDF?)

There's only Texinfo.  Look at texi/Makefile to see how the other
versions are produced.

TL>   How do we properly attribute the previous contributors?
TL> <URI:http://gnus.cvs.sourceforge.net/viewvc/gnus/gnus-faq/src/gnus-faq.xml?view=log>
TL> shows about 50 revisions; can they be imported into the Git
TL> repository in a meaningful way? Otherwise, is it okay/enough
TL> to just make sure that the authors are listed in
TL> gnus-faq.texi and take it from there? (With my mind set to
TL> Wikipedia mode, I'm a bit overcautious in this regard :-).)

I'm not sure what gnus.cvs.sourceforge.net has.  The Gnus CVS repo we
used for the Git import had texi/gnus-faq.texi with what seems like a
reasonable VC log.  Considering the age of the FAQ, we should either
clean it up or move it to be part of the manual IMHO.

Ted

Re: References to my.gnus.org/FAQ

[Frank Schmitt]

Tim Landscheidt <tim@tim-landscheidt.de> writes:

> Ted Zlatanov <tzz@lifelogs.com> wrote:
>
>> TL> there are some references to (dead for some time now)
>> TL> my.gnus.org as the source of the FAQ and to a rather life-
>> TL> less repository at Sourceforge in texi/gnus-faq.texi. Any
>> TL> suggestions on how to clean this up?
>
>> I'm in favor of removing those references and pointing people to the
>> Emacs Wiki and git.gnus.org instead.
>
> What about the format and the history? Apparently,
> gnus-faq.texi was generated from the Docbook source at
> <URI:http://gnus.cvs.sourceforge.net/viewvc/gnus/gnus-faq/>.
> Do we maintain the master source as XML, or has texinfo all
> the output formats we need? (Info? HTML? PDF?)

The conversion from Docbook to Texinfo was quite a pain each time we did
it and required quite some manual work. I'd vote for just staying with
Texinfo (however, maybe the conversion works better today, it was many
years ago that I was involved in this).

>   How do we properly attribute the previous contributors?
> <URI:http://gnus.cvs.sourceforge.net/viewvc/gnus/gnus-faq/src/gnus-faq.xml?view=log>
> shows about 50 revisions; can they be imported into the Git
> repository in a meaningful way? Otherwise, is it okay/enough
> to just make sure that the authors are listed in
> gnus-faq.texi and take it from there? (With my mind set to
> Wikipedia mode, I'm a bit overcautious in this regard :-).)

I don't think it is necessary to import the CVS revisions into Git.

-- 
Have you ever considered how much text can fit in eighty columns?  Given that a
signature typically contains up to four lines of text, this space allows you to
attach a tremendous amount of valuable information to your messages.  Seize the
opportunity and don't waste your signature on bullshit that nobody cares about.

Re: References to my.gnus.org/FAQ

[Tim Landscheidt]

Ted Zlatanov <tzz@lifelogs.com> wrote:

> TL> there are some references to (dead for some time now)
> TL> my.gnus.org as the source of the FAQ and to a rather life-
> TL> less repository at Sourceforge in texi/gnus-faq.texi. Any
> TL> suggestions on how to clean this up?

>>> I'm in favor of removing those references and pointing people to the
>>> Emacs Wiki and git.gnus.org instead.

> TL> What about the format and the history? Apparently,
> TL> gnus-faq.texi was generated from the Docbook source at
> TL> <URI:http://gnus.cvs.sourceforge.net/viewvc/gnus/gnus-faq/>.
> TL> Do we maintain the master source as XML, or has texinfo all
> TL> the output formats we need? (Info? HTML? PDF?)

> There's only Texinfo.  Look at texi/Makefile to see how the other
> versions are produced.

I know; I meant are there output options that the Docbook
format offers that are *not* feasible with Texinfo and that
we consider valuable?

> TL>   How do we properly attribute the previous contributors?
> TL> <URI:http://gnus.cvs.sourceforge.net/viewvc/gnus/gnus-faq/src/gnus-faq.xml?view=log>
> TL> shows about 50 revisions; can they be imported into the Git
> TL> repository in a meaningful way? Otherwise, is it okay/enough
> TL> to just make sure that the authors are listed in
> TL> gnus-faq.texi and take it from there? (With my mind set to
> TL> Wikipedia mode, I'm a bit overcautious in this regard :-).)

> I'm not sure what gnus.cvs.sourceforge.net has.  The Gnus CVS repo we
> used for the Git import had texi/gnus-faq.texi with what seems like a
> reasonable VC log.  Considering the age of the FAQ, we should either
> clean it up or move it to be part of the manual IMHO.

The issue would have been the changes done before and be-
tween imports from SourceForge to the Gnus CVS repository.
But with Frank's mail that's done. Cleaning up the FAQ is of
course still a nice idea :-).

Tim

Re: References to my.gnus.org/FAQ

[Tim Landscheidt]

Frank Schmitt <ich@frank-schmitt.net> wrote:

>>> TL> there are some references to (dead for some time now)
>>> TL> my.gnus.org as the source of the FAQ and to a rather life-
>>> TL> less repository at Sourceforge in texi/gnus-faq.texi. Any
>>> TL> suggestions on how to clean this up?

>>> I'm in favor of removing those references and pointing people to the
>>> Emacs Wiki and git.gnus.org instead.

>> What about the format and the history? Apparently,
>> gnus-faq.texi was generated from the Docbook source at
>> <URI:http://gnus.cvs.sourceforge.net/viewvc/gnus/gnus-faq/>.
>> Do we maintain the master source as XML, or has texinfo all
>> the output formats we need? (Info? HTML? PDF?)

> The conversion from Docbook to Texinfo was quite a pain each time we did
> it and required quite some manual work. I'd vote for just staying with
> Texinfo (however, maybe the conversion works better today, it was many
> years ago that I was involved in this).

I think Texinfo fits very well with an Emacs environment, so
I'm okay with that as well.

>>   How do we properly attribute the previous contributors?
>> <URI:http://gnus.cvs.sourceforge.net/viewvc/gnus/gnus-faq/src/gnus-faq.xml?view=log>
>> shows about 50 revisions; can they be imported into the Git
>> repository in a meaningful way? Otherwise, is it okay/enough
>> to just make sure that the authors are listed in
>> gnus-faq.texi and take it from there? (With my mind set to
>> Wikipedia mode, I'm a bit overcautious in this regard :-).)

> I don't think it is necessary to import the CVS revisions into Git.

As you and Reiner were the primary authors at SourceForge,
that's very nice to hear.

Tim

Re: References to my.gnus.org/FAQ

[Ted Zlatanov]

On Sun, 13 Jun 2010 20:25:32 +0000 Tim Landscheidt <tim@tim-landscheidt.de> wrote: 

TL> I know; I meant are there output options that the Docbook
TL> format offers that are *not* feasible with Texinfo and that
TL> we consider valuable?

Yeah, I think we should only continue with the Texinfo output.  Sorry I
misunderstood.

>> I'm not sure what gnus.cvs.sourceforge.net has.  The Gnus CVS repo we
>> used for the Git import had texi/gnus-faq.texi with what seems like a
>> reasonable VC log.  Considering the age of the FAQ, we should either
>> clean it up or move it to be part of the manual IMHO.

TL> The issue would have been the changes done before and be-
TL> tween imports from SourceForge to the Gnus CVS repository.
TL> But with Frank's mail that's done. Cleaning up the FAQ is of
TL> course still a nice idea :-).

I'd be happiest putting the FAQ in the manual so it can cross-reference
concepts and sections, and so we don't have to worry about the Docbook
format anymore.  Frank, Tim, do you think that's reasonable?

Ted

Re: References to my.gnus.org/FAQ

[Tim Landscheidt]

Ted Zlatanov <tzz@lifelogs.com> wrote:

> [...]
>>> I'm not sure what gnus.cvs.sourceforge.net has.  The Gnus CVS repo we
>>> used for the Git import had texi/gnus-faq.texi with what seems like a
>>> reasonable VC log.  Considering the age of the FAQ, we should either
>>> clean it up or move it to be part of the manual IMHO.

> TL> The issue would have been the changes done before and be-
> TL> tween imports from SourceForge to the Gnus CVS repository.
> TL> But with Frank's mail that's done. Cleaning up the FAQ is of
> TL> course still a nice idea :-).

> I'd be happiest putting the FAQ in the manual so it can cross-reference
> concepts and sections, and so we don't have to worry about the Docbook
> format anymore.  Frank, Tim, do you think that's reasonable?

Well, technically it's already part of the manual :-). I
even remember arguing with Lars whether the link on the web-
site should point directly to the FAQ section :-).

Tim

Re: References to my.gnus.org/FAQ

[Reiner Steib]

On Mon, Jun 14 2010, Ted Zlatanov wrote:

> I'd be happiest putting the FAQ in the manual so it can
> cross-reference concepts and sections,

You could do that also with two separate manuals as well.  But it's
already there: (info "(gnus)Frequently Asked Questions").

> and so we don't have to worry about the Docbook format anymore.

I don't think we need Docbook.

Bye, Reiner.
-- 
       ,,,
      (o o)
---ooO-(_)-Ooo---  |  PGP key available  |  http://rsteib.home.pages.de/

Re: References to my.gnus.org/FAQ

[Frank Schmitt]

Ted Zlatanov <tzz@lifelogs.com> writes:

> I'd be happiest putting the FAQ in the manual so it can cross-reference
> concepts and sections, and so we don't have to worry about the Docbook
> format anymore.  Frank, Tim, do you think that's reasonable?

Sure. One thing which might be worth wile is to try to get the FAQ also
to faqs.org, so a Google search for Gnus FAQ doesn't bring up the
ancient version (this must be like 10 years old) currently referenced there. 

-- 
Have you ever considered how much text can fit in eighty columns?  Given that a
signature typically contains up to four lines of text, this space allows you to
attach a tremendous amount of valuable information to your messages.  Seize the
opportunity and don't waste your signature on bullshit that nobody cares about.

Re: References to my.gnus.org/FAQ

[Ted Zlatanov]

On Tue, 15 Jun 2010 08:22:22 +0200 Reiner Steib <reinersteib+gmane@imap.cc> wrote: 

RS> On Mon, Jun 14 2010, Ted Zlatanov wrote:
>> I'd be happiest putting the FAQ in the manual so it can
>> cross-reference concepts and sections,

RS> You could do that also with two separate manuals as well.  But it's
RS> already there: (info "(gnus)Frequently Asked Questions").

OK.  I don't know enough about that magic corner so thanks to you and
Tim for explaining :)

Ted