Orphaning FreeIPA guide
by Martin Kosek
Hello all,
FreeIPA project is already for some time without sufficient resources to revive
and maintain our former long upstream user guide. We did not find enough
manpower either in FreeIPA developer nor our users community, so we decided to
stop maintaining it.
Detailed justification including links to mail threads in:
http://www.freeipa.org/page/Upstream_User_Guide
I would like to avoid leaving any loose ends on Fedora Documentation project
side, do you have any recommendation for us? I already closed respective
Bugzillas and upstream Trac tickets with explanation. Should we also orphan the
guide in
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Docs_Project_meetings#Guides
or on any other locations? For starters, I think we should close the
"freeipa-guide" component of "Fedora Documentation" as nobody from our team
would be responding there.
Thanks for any advise.
--
Martin Kosek <mkosek(a)redhat.com>
Supervisor, Software Engineering - Identity Management Team
Red Hat Inc.
7 years, 1 month
introduction - Ryan
by Ryan Gough
Hi Everyone,
I'm looking at getting involved in the project as I have been a long
time user of Fedora (e.g. since Core 1) and would like to start
contributing. My name is Ryan, I'm from Western Australia (GMT+8). I
am an IT technician and have been using linux as a hobby since 2k4
(using RH9). I have also had the opportunity to work with RHEL in my
job during a project as well as having worked with a couple of other
distros. In my line of work I have often needed to produce
documentation to a professional standard and I feel I can contribute
this way currently. I believe I should be able to contribute 4 hours a
week at this point in time.
Regards,
Ryan
irc: _terminal_
FAS: t3rm1n4l
7 years, 3 months
Re: Fedora website & docs site feedback
by Brian Exelbierd
+Fedora-docs list
Ian,
Your experience is a lot of the motivation behind the work the fedora-docs folks are doing to fix onboarding, editing, and building of docs. Unfortunately it is slow work, but it is important. If you'd like to help, please join us on the docs list (docs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org) and at our IRC meetings on Mondays from 14:00:00 to 15:00:00 UTC at fedora-meeting(a)irc.freenode.net .
regards,
bex
> On Aug 31, 2015, at 4:37 AM, Ian Kelling <ian(a)iankelling.org> wrote:
>
> I've tried fedora a few times over the years. I recently met Remy
> (fedora community lead) at oscon and he convinced me to give it
> another try and give some feedback. This is meant to be constructive,
> just my impression, I could be missing things.
>
> I google "fedora firewall", because I'd like to learn generally about
> it, how to do a few common things like opening a port, or forwarding
> something. I see links to official fedora docs. So I think, yes, lets
> rtfm!
>
> link 2:
> 2.8.2. Basic Firewall Configuration - Fedora Documentation
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/.../Fedora/.../sect-Security_Guide-Firewal....
>
> (click link, it's fedora 11 doc)
>
> link 3:
> 3.8.13. Configuring the Firewall - Fedora Documentation
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/.../Fedora/.../sec-Configuring_the_Firewal....
>
> (click link, it's fedora 19 doc)
>
> link 4:
> 3.8.9. Disabling firewalld - Fedora Documentation
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en.../Fedora/.../sec-Disabling_firewalld.h....
>
> (click link, it's fedora 20 doc)
>
> link 6:
> 16.7. Firewall Configuration - Fedora Documentation
> docs.fedoraproject.org/.../Fedora/.../s1-redhat-config-kickstart-firewall....
>
> (click link, its fedora 20 doc)
>
> So... now I really want to know if fedora 22 doc has a section on
> firewall.
>
> I see the url's all look like this:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora/19/html/Security_Guide/sec-Co...,
> so I try changing the 19 to 22, but it takes me to
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/index.html.
>
> So then I look for a search feature. I don't see one. So then I expand
> the fedora 22 drop down, and I see 7 high level categories with no
> obvious right place, so now I'm fairly confused as to how to find
> stuff.
>
> So I search firewall on google
> site:https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora/22. And the closest
> thing I see is the #1 link, 14.15. Configure the Firewall to Allow
> Incoming NTP Packets. But I'm wondering if there is a general section
> like link 2 or link 3 from the original google search, so I click around
> some more, I figure there are 4 of the 7 sections in the sidebar which
> could cover firewall: installation guide, networking guide, selinux
> users and administrators guide, and system administrators guide. So I
> click on administrators guide, (and I'm slightly surprised to find a
> comprehensive table of contents, as the ui design of left menu sort of
> implied that it was THE table of contents, not that there was more
> useful list of sections within. Why couldn't I see those things in the
> expandable menu?). I do a word search, find the ntp related link I saw
> before, repeat for the other 3 sections, find one in the installation
> section which looks generic, only learn that installation has a limited
> set of firewall configuration options and this is not what I'm looking
> for. So I'm deciding there is no general firewall documentation for 22.
>
> So now I look back at the best link I originally found,
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora/19/html/Security_Guide/sec-Co...,
> and I think, yes, I'm confirming my original impression that this is
> really the kind of documentation I was looking for, but I'm really
> confused and frustrated: does any of this still apply? did they abandon
> firewall-config? What's the story?
>
> I've had this same experience several times with fedora, and at this
> point I've mostly given up frustrated and annoyed.
>
> Once, when I was feeling a bit more ambitious, I thought. Hmm, maybe I
> can help out on docs, cuz I have noticed the new links like "click to
> contribute to fedora!" So click through, quickly get to this page:
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Join_the_Docs_Project
>
> Well, after 15 minutes of reading lots of stuff I'm not interested in, I
> can't find the source code to the fedora 22 official docs, or anything
> about how to improve them, and I think, I'd have gotten way more done
> by just going to the arch wiki firewall page, and I could have just hit
> edit and improved the thing.
>
> Suggestions: make previous fedora version documentation link to the
> relevant current documentation because google links to old docs are the
> reality for most fedora searches, or if there is no newer, say that, and
> say whether this is still relevant to newer distros. And port
> documentation forward, it seems there is lots of good documentation
> sections which only exist for older fedora versions. Make contributing
> to the official docs possible in some short amount of time. Make a
> search feature (this is 2015), even if it's just to some 3rd party
> search engine (google site search gave me good results).
>
> Oh, and how about filing a bug? First google link: "How to file a bug
> report - FedoraProject"
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_file_a_bug_report It's like a
> horribly bad novel when I wanted a tldr for any reader who's filed bugs
> before for free software projects and wants to file one for fedora:
>
> Up top, "Documentation Summary:", doesn't try whatsoever to summarize
> "how to file a bug report", but just talks about meta things about the
> document, complete waste of my time.
>
> 1st section after the fake summary: "How to File a Bug Report", first
> sentence: "This page describes a procedure for reporting software bugs
> to Fedora developers." Well, I'm not a fedora developer, so this isn't
> for me? Well, I don't see any other way to file a bug sooo, does fedora
> accept bug reports from it's users? And it's redundant, making it just
> bad quality writing, leaving a bad impression, and making me think no
> one actually reads or improves this page. Significant chunk of new users
> are giving up at this
>
> Ok, this is a wiki, so let's try and edit this page. Click log in, which
> leads to this page this page:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Account_System?rd=Infrastructure/AccountSy...,
> which is a novel length page which as far as I can see does not actually
> lead to getting a wiki account! No wonder no one edited the page,
> creating a wiki account if a total nightmare! Suggestion: fix that.
>
> Ok, flash back to the filing a bug wiki page. Next sentence: 'A bug is
> defined as "an error, flaw"'..., am I doing a homework assigment? This
> document is called "how to file a bug report", not spend an hour reading
> wikipedia. Ok, next sentence says this is about
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/, let's skip to the chase and try using
> that, because the rest of this document looks pretty useless.
>
> Go there, and see from the 1st sentence.: "Thank you for visiting Red
> Hat Bugzilla. Red Hat Bugzilla is the Red Hat bug-tracking system and is
> used to submit and review defects that have been found in Red Hat
> distributions." Ok, so am I at the wrong place? This is confusing. Is
> fedora a "a red hat distribution"? I skim
> a bit more... "If you are a Fedora Project user and require assistance,
> please consider using one of the mailing lists we host for the Fedora
> Project. " Well, I'm filing a bug to get "assistance" in it being fixed,
> so it seems I should post it on the mailing list instead?
>
> So, wondering if fedora is a red hat distribution, I remember that there
> is a link on the main fedora page "Learn more about the relationship
> between Red Hat and Fedora »." So I go there. It's not very helpful, its
> not well written to stand on it's own. The first section goes like this
> "jill makes pizza for anyone. John makes pizza for big companies. People
> go to jill in order to collaborate with john. Businesses love john's
> pizza. The end. (notice a gaping hole? Why would someone go to john in
> order to collaborate with jill? And tt's pretty relevant title of the
> page.). Anyways, this one is a minor gripe compared to the rest, but my
> suggestion is to replace it with a higher quality fedora domain page,
> which includes a link to the red hat page.
> --
> websites mailing list
> websites(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/websites
7 years, 4 months
Introduction!
by Major Hayden
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
Hello there,
I just joined the list and I'm excited about being able to contribute to Fedora's documentation! Kushal Das pointed me in this direction after I did some writing about systemd-networkd.
I work on all things virtualization and OpenStack at Rackspace and I write regularly for our company blog and my personal blog[1]. I enjoy writing more comprehensive, functional documentation that shows people how to connect a few different technologies or tools to accomplish something. As an example, I've written some things around systemd-networkd that helps users make sense of the disparate systemd documentation on freedesktop.org. I'd like to do more of this formally for Fedora if possible.
As far as more formal writing goes, I've recently completed a peer-reviewed research paper about Linux container security[2]. This is really fun for me, too.
I'll be in the 5PM session here at Flock today to learn more about how I can contribute!
[1] https://major.io/
[2] https://www.sans.org/reading-room/whitepapers/linux/securing-linux-contai...
pub 4096R/C1011FB1 2015-06-11
Key fingerprint = 1BF9 9264 9596 0033 698C 252B 7370 51E0 C101 1FB1
uid Major Hayden (Personal) <major(a)mhtx.net>
uid Major Hayden (Rackspace) <major.hayden(a)rackspace.com>
uid Major Hayden (Fedora) <mhayden(a)fedoraproject.org>
uid Major Hayden (Keybase) <mhayden(a)keybase.io>
sub 4096R/B322E6F0 2015-06-11
- --
Major Hayden
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2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=M9IR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
7 years, 6 months
[fedora-badges] #259: Fedora Cookbook Contributions
by fedora-badges
#259: Fedora Cookbook Contributions
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: | Owner:
immanetize | Status: new
Type: | Keywords:
New badge idea | Has a description: 0
Priority: | Artwork status: None
minor | External requirements:
Has a name: | Triaged (triagers only): 0
1 |
Concept approved (reviewers only): |
0 |
Badge definition status: |
Full, needs review |
Manually awarded: |
0 |
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
What the badge should be granted for:
Contributing "recipes" to the Fedora Cookbook:
1 submission: Cookbook I: Commis
- "You had a recipe published in the Fedora Cookbook. Appetizing!"
5 submissions: Cookbook II: Tournant
- "You have published 5 recipes in the Fedora Cookbook. Tasty!"
15 submissions: Cookbook III: Grillardin
- "You have published 15 recipes in the Fedora Cookbook. Delicious!"
30 submissions: Cookbook IV: Saucier
- "You have published 30 recipes in the Fedora Cookbook. Scrumptious!"
50 submissions: Cookbook V: Sous Chef
- "You have published 50 recipes in the Fedora Cookbook. Delectable!"
100 submissions: Cookbook VI: Chef de cuisine
- "You have published 100 recipes in the Fedora Cookbook. Decadent!"
150 submissions: Cookbook VII: Gourmand
- "You have published 150 recipes in the Fedora Cookbook. Beefy!"
Badge names borrowed from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brigade_de_cuisine
, suggestions for improvement on names and patter are welcome. Some
dining-related artwork would be greatly appreciated.
Submissions are reviewed and committed manually, so the badges will have
to be manually awarded as well. Anyone in docs-writers should be able to
award these badges.
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-badges/ticket/259>
fedora-badges <https://badges.fedoraproject.org>
A place to collect and debate badge ideas for the Fedora Badges app
7 years, 6 months
[Bug 1249314] New: yumex-dnf is not following the install only_limit config parameter default 3
by Red Hat Bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1249314
Bug ID: 1249314
Summary: yumex-dnf is not following the install only_limit
config parameter default 3
Product: Fedora Documentation
Version: devel
Component: software-management-guide
Severity: medium
Assignee: docs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Reporter: totalitout(a)gmail.com
QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
CC: docs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Fedora; Linux x86_64; rv:39.0)
Gecko/20100101 Firefox/39.0
Build Identifier:
Using yumex-dnf when installing an updated kernel, the oldest kernel is not
removed. All kernels remain installed, apparently without limit. The default
to keep only the 3 newest kernels is ignored. Running: dnf update removes
excess kernels, the limit of 3 is observed.
Reproducible: Always
Steps to Reproduce:
1.Open yumex-dnf, run update.
2.Reboot to load updated kernel.
3.Kernel list displays more than 3 installed kernels.
Actual Results:
More than 3 kernels remain installed. The install only_limit config parameter
default 3 is ignored.
Expected Results:
Oldest kernel should be removed. No more than 3 kernels should remain
installed.
No error message. Didn't have any indication of a problem except when
rebooting noticed the excess kernels listed. This needs to be fixed. It could
cause unaware users to run out of space in their /boot partition.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
7 years, 10 months
[Bug 1008149] New: Contraficting info about the need of shared storage for storing guest images to be migrated
by Red Hat Bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1008149
Bug ID: 1008149
Summary: Contraficting info about the need of shared storage
for storing guest images to be migrated
Product: Fedora Documentation
Version: devel
Component: virtualization-getting-started-guide
Assignee: dayleparker(a)redhat.com
Reporter: jrodrigosm(a)yahoo.es
QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
CC: dayleparker(a)redhat.com, docs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Hi,
In the Fedora 19 "Virtualization Getting Started Guide", section 2.2 ("What is
migration?"), URL
http://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora/19/html/Virtualization_Getting...
In the paragraph right before the 2.2.1 title, it is stated that "In Fedora 19,
shared storage is not necessary for storing guest images to be migrated. With
live storage migration [...]".
But in the last paragraph of the page, right before the note, it is stated that
"Shared, networked storage must be used for storing guest images to be
migrated. Without shared storage, migration is not possible."
These two statements seem contradictory to me. I just started learning about
virtualization, so I am unable to propose an alternative. But I do think some
clarification is needed.
Thanks,
Rodrigo
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=QwkGtwKvp5&a=cc_unsubscribe
7 years, 10 months
[Bug 1267389] New: Error trying to use docname in publican.cfg
by Red Hat Bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1267389
Bug ID: 1267389
Summary: Error trying to use docname in publican.cfg
Product: Fedora Documentation
Version: devel
Component: publican-doc-el6
Severity: high
Assignee: r.landmann(a)redhat.com
Reporter: cheryl.fernandes(a)strongauth.com
QA Contact: nobody(a)fedoraproject.org
CC: docs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, r.landmann(a)redhat.com
Description of problem:
I am using Publican3.2 on Centos6. When I use docname in publican.cfg to
override the <title> tag in the Book_Info.xml and run the following command,
publican build --formats html,pdf --langs en-US --config publican.cfg
I get the following error:
Cannot locate main XML file: '<value of docname>.xml' at /bin/publican line
936.
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
How reproducible:
Easy to reproduce. For me atleast.
Steps to Reproduce:
1. Create a book
2. Add docname to publican.cfg
3. Run command 'publican build --formats html,pdf --langs en-US --config
publican.cfg'
Actual results:
Cannot locate main XML file: '<value of docname>.xml' at /bin/publican line
936.
Expected results:
The title should be different from the book name
Additional info:
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=8l4nJknfES&a=cc_unsubscribe
7 years, 11 months
new tool for updating commonbugs pages
by Adam Williamson
Hi folks!
So a thing I kinda hate doing and hence don't do often enough is update
the common bugs pages to mention when updates are available to fix the
listed issues. So I wrote a script to help! You can find it in the
fedora-qa git repository:
https://git.fedorahosted.org/cgit/fedora-qa.git/tree/commonbugs-update
it requires python-bugzilla, python-fedora and python-wikitcms.
Please do be a bit careful when using it - read the diff it prints
before making changes, and ideally also check mediawiki's history diff
after editing.
At its core what it's meant to do is this: spot when there's an update
to fix an issue but the issue doesn't mention it, and edit the issue
appropriately. As I wrote it, there turned out to be quite a bit more
detail than that, and I even had to tweak the wiki templates a bit. So
to explain some of the less-obvious bits:
There's a big difference between the actions 'Ignore' and 'Skip'.
'Skip' just means 'don't do anything at all about this issue right now'
- it results in no wiki edit. 'Ignore' means 'mark this issue such that
future runs of this script will ignore it'; it adds a magic comment to
the issue, and future runs of the script (by *anyone*, not just you)
will not show that issue. So please be careful with how you wield
Ignore.
The action 'Testing' is for use when the update is in testing, the
action 'Stable' is for use when the update is stable. 'Testing' uses
the Common_bugs_update_testing template, 'Stable' uses the
Common_bugs_update_released template and moves the issue to the
'Resolved issues' section.
There are a couple of actions 'Testing no update' and 'Stable no
update'. What these do is mark that there's an update for the issue,
but it doesn't really *solve* the issue - it's meant for use with
things like installer bugs, where we can ship an update but we can't
fix the frozen images. These actions use new params I added to the wiki
templates today. If you use the 'Stable no update' action the issue
will *not* be moved to the 'Resolved issues' section by default.
Any time you use one of the 'change' actions, you'll be offered the
option to manually edit the text afterwards. If you say yes it'll be
opened in an editor ($EDITOR is respected) and you can tweak it however
you like. You'll notice the text display has a magic line at the top,
that looks like this:
#MOVETORESOLVED: True
(or maybe False). That lets you change whether the issue will be moved
to the 'Resolved issues' section or not. If the word 'True' or 'true'
appears anywhere on that line, the issue will be moved; if not, it
won't. The default value is set to True if you use the 'Stable' action,
False in any other case.
Don't trim trailing newlines in the editor, they're there for a reason.
mediawiki whitespace handling is just the worst. :)
I've used the tool to update the F21, F22 and F23 pages today, so there
are no changes needed right now (it will display a few issues, those
are ones I reckon should be 'skipped' but not 'ignored' for now), but
we can use this to hopefully keep them up to date better in future.
Note the tool won't work right on <F20 pages as they don't use the
templates for referencing updates.
The code is somewhat ugly for now, I might clean it up at some point,
but I already spent ~1.5 days longer on this than I expected to :/
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
http://www.happyassassin.net
8 years
