FAD Report

Zach Oglesby oglesbyzm at gmail.com
Tue Sep 13 01:12:31 UTC 2011

Hash: SHA1

The following is a copy of the etherpad notes from the FAD with my notes included. Please provide feedback and ideas.

 * Write an email to the legal@ list to propose:
   * copyright attribution be to "Fedora Project contributors, as listed at the following URL: ____
     * Update the license text on the Fedora publican brand to remove the HOLDER entity and instead have the wiki-link entity
   * Spot add to Licensing page instructions on how to satisfy the attribution clause of the CC licensing (Sparks by 12  Sep)
   * Propose how we should attribute back to our contributors (Sparks by 12 Sep)

We need to figure out how to give proper attribution to contributors and translators but doing so in the doc has lots of challenges. In order to fix this issue we are going to move the working of the license into the publican-fedora package and use a variable for the a wiki link that each doc will include.

 * Design a QA process
   * Author
     * Author creates "significant" change to a document
     * Create a bug assigned to Docs QA including a patch with the changed bit, and a link to the original document
     * ** Wait for QA to review the patch **
     * Apply patch and push to master
   * Reviewer
     * Review email sent to docs-qa list (We need to make docs-qa the QA contact for docs)
     * Reviewer accepts bug and begins review
     * Reviewer verifies content of patch for spelling errors and validity of information
     * Reviewer merges content into original and verifies grammar and proper structure
     * Note that the patch is good and assign the bug back to the writer

This was talked about in today's meeting and we are going to adjust this a little but keep it mostly the same. We are going to use a staging branch that is used to build draft docs, and each time you make the draft a patch will also be submitted to bugzilla including a link to the draft. Once QA looks and says the content is okay it can be moved to master.

 * Document the translation process? (zoglesby 12 Sep)
   * Propose change to translation process: that Translators own their translation and publish when ready
     * Give translators commit and publish rights
     * Bugs for a document that are against translations will be triaged by the Docs team and assigned to the appropriate translation team

We are going to start talks with the L10N team about them owning there own translations. This means that they have control of when and what is pushed to the web, and takes the guess work out for the docs team.

 * Propose removing the Release Notes from the releases (RPM) and only provide this via the docs.fp.o website.
   * To Docs list and to releng at fp.o and to blog (Sparks by 11 Sep COMPLETED)

We are talking about this on the list already.

- -- 
Zach Oglesby
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)


More information about the docs mailing list