Wiki Markup Comparison
by A. Mani
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
See http://www.wikicreole.org/wiki/Reasoning
for a good comparison of all types of wiki markup
They have good arguments for their choice of 'least confusing' markup.
Best
A. Mani
--
A. Mani
Member, Cal. Math. Soc
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
iEUEARECAAYFAknCY5AACgkQunMISzvdfU6OYwCYki6ZD7m3sJf2yLVowPIfWtov
eQCdGseki+exJULUTkeQLkh8bbPzDC0=
=ru9U
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
15 years, 1 month
PPC in the Install Guide
by David Nalley
So Rudi has been doing a ton of work on the Install Guide and we were
talking tonight about the status of PPC.
Currently we have a note in the IG where PPC installation differs.
This is a bit cumbersome and for a few other reasons wanted to seek
the 'Wisdom of the List' in how this should be handled.
Our options are:
1. Continue with the exceptions process
2. Adopt the RHEL solution - which is to have a separate section in
the same document that transcludes a lot of the identical content.)
3. Drop PPC from the Install Guide
3a: Drop PPC from the Install Guide and bring it back in F12 if there
is an uprising calling for our heads.
3b. Drop PPC from the Install Guide and Create a PPC IG
3c. Drop PPC from the IG and let a PPC-SIG pick it up
So discussing it amongst ourselves we both seem to like the 3a
solution (Drop content and revert if there is an uprising). Our
justification is:
1. PPC on pre-intel Macs is really aging hardware, so we are likely
talking about when to drop rather than if.
2. PPC hardware is hard to come by. Currently no one working on the IG
has PPC hardware in their possession, though Rudi says he can lay his
hands on a machine if need be.
3. Removing the exception notes makes the document a cleaner read
4. It's less work.
Barring any justifications to the contrary or directives from one of
our fearless leaders by CoB on Friday Mar 20th this will be the we
will be the approach for the F11 IG.
Comments and flames welcome
15 years, 1 month
Re: Uninstall Fedora - steps
by A. Mani
mike(a)vegasitpros.com wrote:
> Why would anyone with a rational frame of mind want to uninstall fedora? So they could spend thousands of hard earned dollars to get the equivalent functions with windows?
To use FreeBSD testing as primary OS... what else?
:)
Best
A. Mani
--
A. Mani
Member, Cal. Math. Soc
15 years, 1 month
Re: Uninstall Fedora - steps
by Mike Dittmeier
Why would anyone with a rational frame of mind want to uninstall fedora? So they could spend thousands of hard earned dollars to get the equivalent functions with windows?
It must be the full moon...
------Original Message------
From: Rahul Sundaram
Sender: fedora-docs-list-bounces(a)redhat.com
To: For participants of the Documentation Project
ReplyTo: For participants of the Documentation Project
Subject: Uninstall Fedora - steps
Sent: Mar 14, 2009 2:29 PM
Hi
I don't think is actually a big dirty secret but perhaps we can quick
through together some steps for a end user who wants to do so? I do see
some forums posts rarely from users asking for this. Who wants to step up?
http://blogs.computerworld.com/linuxs_dirty_little_secret_uninstall
Rahul
--
fedora-docs-list mailing list
fedora-docs-list(a)redhat.com
To unsubscribe:
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-docs-list
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
15 years, 1 month
Re: Uninstall Fedora - steps
by Mike Dittmeier
Fdisk /dev/sda
When prompted enter "d" then "o" then "w" to write changes to disk.
The os is now removed
Ditt
------Original Message------
From: Rahul Sundaram
Sender: fedora-docs-list-bounces(a)redhat.com
To: For participants of the Documentation Project
ReplyTo: For participants of the Documentation Project
Subject: Uninstall Fedora - steps
Sent: Mar 14, 2009 2:29 PM
Hi
I don't think is actually a big dirty secret but perhaps we can quick
through together some steps for a end user who wants to do so? I do see
some forums posts rarely from users asking for this. Who wants to step up?
http://blogs.computerworld.com/linuxs_dirty_little_secret_uninstall
Rahul
--
fedora-docs-list mailing list
fedora-docs-list(a)redhat.com
To unsubscribe:
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-docs-list
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
15 years, 1 month
Publican Issues for RNs
by John J. McDonough
Let me preface this by mentioning that I haven't got a clue about packaging,
so assuming I am a complete idiot wouldn't be inappropriate.
Eric discovered back in January that there are a couple of show stoppers to
using Publican for Docs. He thought he was going to get the issues fixed in
a short time, but that hasn't happened, and it doesn't look like it will
happen. Eric developed a workaround by hacking Publican. Unfortunately,
using this approach would require everyone participating in Docs to have a
hacked Publican, and the hack breaks Publican for other uses. A switch
would be nice, and acceptable to the Publican developers, but apparently it
would take a lot of effort and there is only one maintainer.
Publican does almost everything we need to do between the wiki and the RPM,
so we would really like to use it rather than the mish-mash of tools we
currently have.
There are two problems:
1) Publican names the package incorrectly
2) The .desktop file is handled differently than the reviewers would like
Now it seems to me, worst case we could run Publican and then package the
HTMLs manually. But since Publican already does most of the heavy lifting,
why not simply patch Publican's work after the fact.
To this end, I made an attempt to do the following:
1) Unpack the SRPM produced by Publican, The SRPM has 2 files, a tarball and
a specfile
2) Rename the tarball, which involves untarring and retarring it
3) Edit the specfile
4) rpmbuild
I wrote down the details of what I did at
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Jjmcd/Drafts/Converting_Publican_RPM_...
When I do this, the resulting RPM passes rpmlint, installs correctly, and
seems to meet the guidelines. What am I missing? Well, appears to install
correctly. A menu entry appears and when I click on it I see release notes.
Maybe there are less obvious things going on.
As far as the .desktop file, I don't fully understand the issue here. The
code produced by Publican appears to be almost identical to that in the
packaging guidelines on the wiki and very similar to what it is in the
current release notes. David Nally tells me of an entirely different way to
deal with the .desktop file but I don't know enough to understand why it is
better.
So what I'm asking is:
1) Is this totally wrong-headed and we should be looking up another avenue
2) How can this approach be made better
3) Is there some other way
Thanks
--McD
15 years, 1 month
Introduction
by Tiago Vieira
Hi there
I've been following some fedora's lists and getting into some projects that I believe I can help.
Fedora docs is one of the projects that I believe I can do it, and I would be glad to be part of that.
My name is Tiago, I'm Brazilian but living in UK for few years. I've done my Bsc. in CS and I'm just to begin my Msc. in Soft. Engineering in Oxford. I'm also taking the RHCE test in April. I like to read code and man pages. :)
I would be grateful to be accepted within this group. I also congratulation all of you for the wonderful job you have been doing for the Fedora planet.
So, this is my self-introduction. Hope I can help with something in my spare times.
Freedom | Friends | Features | First
Cheers!
--
Tiago (r0xc0rp) Vieira tiagovieira(a)fedoraproject.org tel:+44-7595223968
Fedora Talk: 5125164 / E9CE CC25 0009 A08D F79E B660 08DA EAF5 47EA 1F16
15 years, 1 month
