[Zope] documentation defacement

[Chris Withers]

Chris McDonough wrote:

> 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.  

I agree, STX is fine, and comments are worthwhile provided there's a 
canonical place to update things crap comments can be weeded safely and 
good comments can be integrated back ASAP.

The problem I see is that with a source repository, you'll forever be 
synching with the ZODB copy and worrying about comments. Years ago, I 
dreamed of something ViewCVS-ish that could render stuff instead of just 
checking it out, that way anyone could instantly view and comment on any 
branch and usual version control practices could be used to control what 
changes happen and where.

Sadly, I don't think anyone has the time to develop such a beast ;-)

So, I reckon we should stick with the current software, and do work in 
one canonical place. Although I do have some feature requests:

- make that f'ing comments button stick, and be off by default ;-)

- add a check box per chapter that lets an Editor lock a chapter for 
editing. This is a shroter term thn the chapter signup on Plope.org and 
just lets you lock the chapter so only you can edit, while you're 
editing. Anyone leaving a chapter in a locked state at any other time 
should be neutered...

> 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.

Which development docs are you referring to?

cheers,

Chris

-- 
Simplistix - Content Management, Zope & Python Consulting
            - http://www.simplistix.co.uk