[Cosmo] [cosma] Re3: Cosmo Possibilities (Brian Moseley)
Glen FPD Main Ritchie
glnritchie at floatingpointdesigns.com
Thu Jan 19 20:55:17 PST 2006
In the spirit of threading. (This message was sent, at first to a
moderator? So, hopefully, I don't duplicate it.)
><taking this conversation to the cosmo list>
>On 1/13/06, Glen FPD Main Ritchie <glnritchie at floatingpointdesigns.com>
>> = When you say "three manuals." You are referring to a manual on:
>> Scooby, Chandler, and Cosmo? (When I get there. I'll start with
>> somewhere on one only, of course.)
>nope, i mean the end user, administrator and developer guides that are
>all linked from the cosmo project page.
Ok, I'll start with end-user on Cosmo.
>> = This contextual help system in the web console? Is that part of
>> Chandler or your OSAF software? I'd rather stay out of coding, if I'm
>> just trying to keep the documents straight. (Otherwise, an HTML
>> jumping to a file location, with the Cosmo installer should work,
>the contextual help system will be part of the cosmo app, but how
>that's implemented is up for discussion. we could include the help
>system in the distributed cosmo software, or cosmo could link out to a
>an osaf-hosted web site. we'll certainly need to discuss before making
Ok, as the Cosmo group hasn't defined how they're going to do a help
system or documentation. (1) I'll leave it in your guys/gals hands.
(2) What I make, I just hope can be repurposed to your uses.
(3) Otherwise, placing the document(s) on your web site is fine.
>> I'd like to follow a DocBook format. This way, PS, PDF, HTML, can be
>> rendered off to everyone's heart content.
>sounds fine to me. are you familiar with the tools for generating
>output formats from docbook? i'm certainly not.
Yes, I am. The Fedora project is quite active with DocBook, besides
following the Free OSS maxim, everywhere.
?? Which Linux distro does your team prefer? I'm active with Debian,
SuSE, Fedora. ==> Your version numbers on tools seem to be quite newly
I ask this, because, as I develop the DocBook material and so forth.
Makes sense to me, to use, what you're using. So, when it rebuilds, if
manual or automated, it works in CA, also.
Otherwise, switching to a Knoppix system capable of DocBook building is
another alternative. For me, others (outside OSAF), or temporarily at
? Thoughts anyone?
>i'm betting that maven (the build tool we use for cosmo) has the
>ability to generate output from docbook source, so that we can
>integrate this step into the build process.
Just a first look at Maven for me. I don't see DocBook at being
listed "for working" inside or or with it? (Maven is an apache automated
building tool, The documentation side of it, is to make a web site from
whatever source and such is declared. If this isn't fully accurate, feel
free to correct me.) (I don't think it would be a good idea, to hack
Maven to support DocBook, for me or OSAF. Unless, it is just a matter of
adding some more build lines to its Makefile-counter-part?)
!! Anyone else, thoughts?
>> So, when I start composing the sources. (1) We'll need a place to put
>> it. (2) I'd prefer some kind of revision system; CVS, Arch,
>> or whatever you guys use? (3) Then, when you decide the content is up
>> any means using it for just this one project.)
>understood. i'll check to confirm, since i'm not sure if there are
>firm policies in place. we haven't yet had anybody from outside
>seriously contribute to any of the server projects, so i'm just not
I would like to seriously contribute. With that said, this isn't going
to be a short-term commitment, I know. If at a (far) later date, someone
needs to take over my contributions? I don't mind handing it off. As
long, as I am notified and kept informed of the changes, as is only
professional for all of us, of course.
>my gut feeling, though, is that you can offer patches/docbook source
>files/whatever, under a license that's compatible with cosmo (apache
>2.0, or perhaps creative commons), and somebody with commit privileges
>on the cosmo repository will check them in unless the content is
>absolutely unacceptable. so the stamp of approval would come from the
>cosmo committers, not from some committee within osaf.
>> I have my own web site URL & I don't necessarily need to "place
>> on your servers. However, if this is Cosmo documentation or other
>> I'd certainly prefer you guys become the archivers and maintainers of
>> it's sources. (I have no issue with signing over the copyright to
>> as well.)
>well, i think that the documentation for cosmo should live in the same
>place as the source code.
Ok, this is all getting very territorial.
* I'm fine with your docs, on your web site.
* However, if I'm writing my content (under Creative Commons), to
contribute to your project?
(1) It isn't fair to burden someone else, with double checking (or
responsibility) for my content.
(2) I don't care for the idea of "submit files" via person proxy. (i.e.
If I'm not the writer of it? Then, why am writing blank.)
(3) If DocBook doesn't work, or if OSAF wants to change, how I might
submit material? I could do that, too. I'm not 100% fixed on DocBook.
(Although, it is pretty much the best / real way to do all this
high-level document writing. Unless, OSAF has a texinfo person on
(4) As I submit material, I would prefer the privilege of mirroring it
on my own site, as complying with the Creative Commons license, of
course. (I'm not going to mirror anything else, though, for whomever is
Ergot, I hope that isn't a deal breaker?
(5) So, if your organization might prefer "reforming" in one of the
Wikis? A second image, I'm capable of that also. (Please tell me "which
Wiki." So, I don't make a mess for anyone. When, I get to that point.)
More information about the Cosmo