publishing group suggestion

[Nick Bebout]

+1.

Also, I suggested on IRC that we make docs be the commit group to the docs
repos on fedorahosted.  This is an easy change, and shouldn't even make
anyone have to re-clone their repos on their computer (All it requires is
a sysadmin-hosted member to chgrp the repos on the server)

Nick

> 11:12 < quaid> ok, here's a thought ...
> 11:12 < quaid> long tradition is that 'docs' gave full commit access
>    to content; I see people still do
>                that with f'hosted repos
> 11:12 < quaid> (mostly)
> 11:13 < quaid> we had publishing separate because it was different,
>    separate, required training to not
>                break, etc.
> 11:13 < quaid> but if we're going to be publishing websites with
>    publican as the cms (basically)
> 11:13 < quaid> why not just use 'docs' group as who can publish?
>
> What I was also saying is that we have this:
>
> CMS for docs.fp.o:
> * Publican handles publishing and building of content for the web.
> * FAS handles authentication.
> * Beacon with DocBook extensions could be the wysiwyg editor.
>
> 'docs' group membership could be sufficient for publishing.  Why add
> another group when we have one well populated with all the people we
> want able to publish immediately?
>
> This lowers the barriers a lot for using Publican, but it doesn't give
> us a CMS that invites the 10x participation that we get through the
> wiki-like interfaces.  Having an easy web authentication layer with a
> nice WYSIWYG editor (and a publish button) is a very important goal.
>
> - Karsten
> --
> name:  Karsten 'quaid' Wade, Sr. Community Gardener
> team:                Red Hat Community Architecture
> uri:               http://TheOpenSourceWay.org/wiki
> gpg:                                       AD0E0C41
> --
> docs mailing list
> docs at lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe:
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/docs