PPC in the Install Guide

[David Nalley]

On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 9:15 AM, Susan Lauber
<laubersm at fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 11:03 PM, David Nalley
> <david.nalley at fedoraproject.org> wrote:
>> So Rudi has been doing a ton of work on the Install Guide and we were
>> talking tonight about the status of PPC.
>
> Very cool stuff!  Thanks Rudi.
>
>>
>> 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.
>
> Those sound like fair reasons to drop it from the formal and translated IG.
> I can support 3a.
>
> I have a question about option 3c though - do you mean as a guide in
> XML with requirements of translation and meeting release cycles?  Or
> do you mean in any format they so desire?  If the later, I think we
> can help a little rather than just drop the content.

I don't care how they do it, not my place to tell those who want to do
the work how they should do it.

> How hard is it to put the current (F10) version into a HOWTO on the wiki?

So to my knowledge the install guide hasn't lived on the wiki ever.
This means we'd need to do a dump from XML (or rendered format) to
wiki. While I am not inherently opposed to this, I'd want to know that
a SIG was going to pick it up first before we go to those lengths.
Keep in mind the F10 IG is around 70 printed pages (from a single html
page). F11 IG that I just printed is currently 116 pages. So we are
talking about a ton of additional content in the wiki if we spawn a
separate document. If they are going to do a short howto it's probably
easier to just do so  by creating anew.

> This way it is EASY for anyone (SIG or user) to copy and update to F11
> if they so choose.  I think it much more likely to get done at all if
> the structure is already there and done correctly if the users do it
> themselves.  Don't forget to tell the SIG it exists ;)
>
I'll work on getting them up to speed shortly.