<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><br><div><div>On Aug 5, 2012, at 3:20 PM, Anne Gentle wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite">Hey all, sorry for top posting but I'm not sure how to insert comments without sounding weird. :) <div><br></div><div>I'm completely fine with starting it in DocBook, (I <3 markup, hee hee) but I had two concerns really, one about the markup authors want, and another about the license for the Operations manual chapters. <div>
<br></div><div>I've been talking to Debra at Pearson, on the To: line (Hi Debra!) and we are looking for authors for some of the operations chapters to be part of a larger book about running and deploying OpenStack. So I would love for you to start as author but want to be sure it's okay that the license is such that we're sharing those chapters with Pearson for a larger book. The outline is <a href="http://etherpad.openstack.org/EssexOperationsGuide" target="_blank">http://etherpad.openstack.org/EssexOperationsGuide</a> for the operations part, and Doug Hellman and I have worked on an outline for the "Developing" part at <a href="http://etherpad.openstack.org/PythonDevBookOutline">http://etherpad.openstack.org/PythonDevBookOutline</a>. The two together comprise a book proposal for Pearson. </div>
<div><br></div><div>Debra, if you have any pointers for the "source" files that would help us decide amongst DocBook or markdown or asciidoc, let us know. </div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I have a bit of experience with DocBook, and IIRC it was an option with Pearson. My book was done with Sphinx and LaTeX with only moderate pain during the compositing phase.</div><br><blockquote type="cite"><div><div><br></div><div>I'm trying to be transparent about the re-uses that operations manual can be used for and make sure we're all good with it. I know I am - sharing content with a 3rd party publisher sounds like the best of two worlds to me. But I welcome discussion - thanks Jon for bringing it to the mailing list, sorry I didn't do so sooner. Please discuss. :) </div>
<div><br></div><div>I think one good path is:</div><div>1. Un-abandon review 10487. </div><div>2. In the book file make sure CC licensing is set. </div><div>3. Start writing based on the outline.</div><div>4. Rock out.</div>
<div>5. Do maintenance going forward in a common authoring environment. </div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Anything that makes merging and collaborating easy works for me. What tools are the group used to working with?</div><div><br></div><div>Doug</div><br><blockquote type="cite"><div><div><br></div><div>Thoughts?</div><div><br></div><div>Anne<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sun, Aug 5, 2012 at 1:49 PM, Jonathan Proulx <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:jon@jonproulx.com" target="_blank">jon@jonproulx.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">I'd really like to have an operations manual to read but since it's<br>
not written yet and I need to start writing internal operations<br>
documentation I'd be happy to help write it as I go...<br>
<br>
In <a href="https://review.openstack.org/#/c/10487" target="_blank">https://review.openstack.org/#/c/10487</a><br>
<br>
Tom translated the etherpad outline at<br>
<a href="http://etherpad.openstack.org/EssexOperationsGuide" target="_blank">http://etherpad.openstack.org/EssexOperationsGuide</a> into docbook. Anne<br>
expressed concern about setting the mark up format and scaring off<br>
potential contributors. Lorin expressed some support for trying out a<br>
lighter markup to see if that attracted more authors and someone of<br>
that set of people suggested moving the discussion to this mailing<br>
list.<br>
<br>
I've not see any discussion here so let's discuss :)<br>
<br>
I don't have any background in document markup, only even looked at<br>
docbook maybe two weeks ago when I was trying to figure out my first<br>
documentation bug fix, so I don't have any particular opinions other<br>
than thinking we should set something so that it's possible for<br>
authors to start contributing. There's a lot of value in using the<br>
lightest markup that will do everything we need but there's also value<br>
in sticking to a single markup standard especially when someone has<br>
contributed an outline in that.<br>
<br>
I suppose my vote would be to accept<br>
<a href="https://review.openstack.org/#/c/10487" target="_blank">https://review.openstack.org/#/c/10487</a> and start building from there<br>
but if someone wanted to contribute the equivalent in another markup I<br>
wouldn't be opposed.<br>
<br>
-Jon<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Openstack-docs mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Openstack-docs@lists.openstack.org">Openstack-docs@lists.openstack.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-docs" target="_blank">http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-docs</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br></div></div>
</blockquote></div><br></body></html>