[Zope] documentation defacement

[Paul Winkler]

On Tue, Jan 25, 2005 at 05:00:50PM -0500, Chris McDonough wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-01-25 at 16:06, Paul Winkler wrote:
> 
> Or use the sourceforge book project CVS.
> > I tend to agree w/ Fred and Chris W that this would be
> > better and, in the long run, easier.
> 
> That'd be fine as well.  The only real reason the dev versions are
> Backtalk now is in order to have them available for display to docs
> seekers.  We could maybe just ditch Backtalk/STX altogether, but I'm not
> sure what the alternative is.  I do think the commenting features are
> valuable, as much as they may be abused. 

My thought was that the cvs project would just contain
stx files that we can upload as Backtalk chapters.

This would mean we should figure out a workflow for
the ZODB data and a release process for the CVS data
that allows us to merge in both directions (i.e.
merge zope.org comments to CVS in preparation for
editing a chapter, and lock the zope.org version
for a short period of time to allow getting the
cvs stuff ready to deploy; then upload to
zope.org and unlock it.) 

This is basically what we're already doing on an informal
basis.  I've had to search through the zope.org version of 
Appendix B a couple times, looking for comments added
since I started work.  And I have to manually keep track
of when I last did this.

> I'll also note that the last
> change made to the development docs was many months ago, and I'm not
> sure that moving them into another system will improve that in any way.

You mean the dev guide?  Yeah AFAIK nobody does much with it.

-- 

Paul Winkler
http://www.slinkp.com