Wiki is OK (was Re: why o why)

[Karsten Wade]

On Thu, 2005-04-21 at 11:09 -0500, Eric Rostetter wrote:

> I think, just as an addendum, that these types of requirements are not
> only why the Fedora Documentation Project will ultimately produce fine,
> proffessional docs, but also why there is a need for other sites like
> fedoranews.org for less formal documentation to live.

+1

It's why we have the process around producing software packages.  This
project attempts to mimic the open source development process wherever
possible.  Some programs you write in Java and some in C.

> Having said that, and my previous posting, maybe it would be good to
> discuss putting up a wiki for the FDP to use in creating docs, which
> someone would then convert to DocBook for submission...  Just an idea,
> I've no real stake in it either way.

We will accept submissions in practically _any_ format.  We will not
accept something thrown over the wall _unless_ a maintainer steps
forward.  

I'll start a new thread to make this clear.

- Karsten
-- 
Karsten Wade, RHCE * Sr. Tech Writer * http://people.redhat.com/kwade/
gpg fingerprint:  2680 DBFD D968 3141 0115    5F1B D992 0E06 AD0E 0C41   
                       Red Hat SELinux Guide
http://www.redhat.com/docs/manuals/enterprise/RHEL-4-Manual/selinux-guide/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/docs/attachments/20050421/55536194/attachment.bin