summaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstats
path: root/zarb-ml/mageia-discuss/20101026/002655.html
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
Diffstat (limited to 'zarb-ml/mageia-discuss/20101026/002655.html')
-rw-r--r--zarb-ml/mageia-discuss/20101026/002655.html176
1 files changed, 176 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/zarb-ml/mageia-discuss/20101026/002655.html b/zarb-ml/mageia-discuss/20101026/002655.html
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..ddc5cda14
--- /dev/null
+++ b/zarb-ml/mageia-discuss/20101026/002655.html
@@ -0,0 +1,176 @@
+<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
+<HTML>
+ <HEAD>
+ <TITLE> [Mageia-discuss] Suggestions
+ </TITLE>
+ <LINK REL="Index" HREF="index.html" >
+ <LINK REL="made" HREF="mailto:mageia-discuss%40mageia.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BMageia-discuss%5D%20Suggestions&In-Reply-To=%3C4CC5FE3C.7090501%40laposte.net%3E">
+ <META NAME="robots" CONTENT="index,nofollow">
+ <META http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
+
+ <LINK REL="Next" HREF="002656.html">
+ </HEAD>
+ <BODY BGCOLOR="#ffffff">
+ <H1>[Mageia-discuss] Suggestions</H1>
+ <B>andre999</B>
+ <A HREF="mailto:mageia-discuss%40mageia.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BMageia-discuss%5D%20Suggestions&In-Reply-To=%3C4CC5FE3C.7090501%40laposte.net%3E"
+ TITLE="[Mageia-discuss] Suggestions">andr55 at laposte.net
+ </A><BR>
+ <I>Tue Oct 26 00:01:32 CEST 2010</I>
+ <P><UL>
+
+ <LI>Next message: <A HREF="002656.html">[Mageia-discuss] Suggestions
+</A></li>
+ <LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B>
+ <a href="date.html#2655">[ date ]</a>
+ <a href="thread.html#2655">[ thread ]</a>
+ <a href="subject.html#2655">[ subject ]</a>
+ <a href="author.html#2655">[ author ]</a>
+ </LI>
+ </UL>
+ <HR>
+<!--beginarticle-->
+<PRE>andre999 a &#233;crit :
+&gt;<i>
+</I>&gt;<i> Wolfgang Bornath a &#233;crit :
+</I>&gt;&gt;<i>
+</I>&gt;<i>
+</I>&gt;&gt;<i> 2010/10/25 Wayne Sallee &lt;<A HREF="https://www.mageia.org/mailman/listinfo/mageia-discuss">Wayne at waynesallee.com</A>&gt;:
+</I>&gt;<i>
+</I>&gt;&gt;<i> &gt; Wolfgang Bornath wrote on 10/25/2010 12:24 PM:
+</I>&gt;<i>
+</I>&gt;&gt;<i> &gt;&gt;
+</I>&gt;<i>
+</I>&gt;&gt;<i> &gt;&gt; I don't think it would help. There is (was) the tag &quot;Doc&quot;
+</I>&gt;<i> (or
+</I>&gt;<i>
+</I>&gt;&gt;<i> &gt;&gt; similar) in Bugzilla which already marked the bug as
+</I>&gt;<i> something
+</I>&gt;<i>
+</I>&gt;&gt;<i> &gt;&gt; related to documentation. Somebody who is concerned and
+</I>&gt;<i> ignored
+</I>&gt;<i>
+</I>&gt;&gt;<i> &gt;&gt; that would also ignore a separate section and vice versa.
+</I>&gt;<i> I like
+</I>&gt;<i>
+</I>&gt;&gt;<i> &gt;&gt; a more general approach involving the users and packagers
+</I>&gt;<i>
+</I>&gt;&gt;<i> &gt;&gt; likewise:
+</I>&gt;<i>
+</I>&gt;&gt;<i> &gt;
+</I>&gt;<i>
+</I>&gt;&gt;<i> &gt; Yea I think that having it all in the same bugzilla is best,
+</I>&gt;<i> though
+</I>&gt;<i>
+</I>&gt;&gt;<i> &gt; most newbees are not going to think of posting the issue in a
+</I>&gt;<i> bug
+</I>&gt;<i>
+</I>&gt;&gt;<i> &gt; report. Most newbees are going to think that bug reports are
+</I>&gt;<i> for
+</I>&gt;<i>
+</I>&gt;&gt;<i> &gt; the software not working right. So I think we need to somehow
+</I>&gt;<i> let
+</I>&gt;<i>
+</I>&gt;&gt;<i> &gt; the newbees know that bugzilla is the place to report
+</I>&gt;<i> improvements
+</I>&gt;<i>
+</I>&gt;&gt;<i> &gt; needed in rpm documentation.
+</I>&gt;<i>
+</I>&gt;&gt;<i>
+</I>&gt;<i>
+</I>&gt;&gt;<i> That's where the part is coming in which you cut from the quote of
+</I>&gt;<i> my
+</I>&gt;<i>
+</I>&gt;&gt;<i> mail :)
+</I>&gt;<i>
+</I>&gt;<i> What about &quot;docuzilla&quot;, a place to treat documentation ?
+</I>&gt;<i>
+</I>&gt;<i> There is a fundamental difference between software bugs, and
+</I>&gt;<i> documentation considerations.
+</I>&gt;<i> Software bugs often do not have an obvious cause, and generally
+</I>&gt;<i> require a level of technical
+</I>&gt;<i> expertise that surpasses the average user.
+</I>&gt;<i> For documentation, the problem, and its solution, are generally
+</I>&gt;<i> obvious to an average user who understands
+</I>&gt;<i> the language in question.
+</I>&gt;<i> There is the problem, for the package description, of knowing what the
+</I>&gt;<i> program does, but although
+</I>&gt;<i> the developers can give a technical description, this often has to be
+</I>&gt;<i> reworked to be in a form
+</I>&gt;<i> the average non-technical user can understand.
+</I>&gt;<i>
+</I>&gt;<i> 1) Documentation and text displayed in programs have to be localised.
+</I>&gt;<i> Program logic does not.
+</I>&gt;<i> (At least, beyond doing internationised coding.)
+</I>&gt;<i>
+</I>&gt;<i> 2) Documentation has to be presented in a manner that non-technical
+</I>&gt;<i> users can understand.
+</I>&gt;<i> Program logic has to be presented in a manner that technical people
+</I>&gt;<i> can follow.
+</I>&gt;<i>
+</I>&gt;<i> 3) Problems with documentation is generally best corrected by
+</I>&gt;<i> non-technical users.
+</I>&gt;<i> Program logic is the domain of technical specialists.
+</I>&gt;<i>
+</I>&gt;<i> 4) Documentation is best developed and corrected together, in
+</I>&gt;<i> essentially the same process.
+</I>&gt;<i> Program development and debugging are different processes, although
+</I>&gt;<i> they can involve the
+</I>&gt;<i> same people.
+</I>&gt;<i>
+</I>&gt;<i> Bugzilla could be used for both types of problems. Maybe just
+</I>&gt;<i> separating the input and
+</I>&gt;<i> correction interfaces would suffice, but it seems to me that we
+</I>&gt;<i> really need to take a
+</I>&gt;<i> different approach to the 2 types of problems.
+</I>&gt;<i>
+</I>&gt;<i> Here we are all technical people (not necessarily developers), and we
+</I>&gt;<i> have no problem with bug
+</I>&gt;<i> reports, etc.
+</I>&gt;<i> But many documenters and translaters are essentially non-technical,
+</I>&gt;<i> and they should have a good
+</I>&gt;<i> sense of presentation to non-technical users in order to make credible
+</I>&gt;<i> contributions.
+</I>&gt;<i> And when they contribute corrections, they have no need of the
+</I>&gt;<i> formalised process of bugzilla.
+</I>&gt;<i> A correction is generally a quick glance, verify the context, and it's
+</I>&gt;<i> done.
+</I>&gt;<i>
+</I>&gt;<i> Whence my proposal for a separate section of bugzilla. More
+</I>&gt;<i> accessible for non-technical users,
+</I>&gt;<i> who thus risque to contribute more actively to Mageia.
+</I>&gt;<i>
+</I>&gt;<i> But if anyone has a better idea ...
+</I>&gt;<i>
+</I>&gt;<i> Another 2 cents :)
+</I>&gt;<i>
+</I>&gt;<i> - Andr&#233;
+</I>
+BTW, just think of our interactions, at least wobo and myself, with
+those in the marketing group.
+A different focus can require a different approach ... :)
+
+- Andr&#233;
+
+</PRE>
+
+
+<!--endarticle-->
+ <HR>
+ <P><UL>
+ <!--threads-->
+
+ <LI>Next message: <A HREF="002656.html">[Mageia-discuss] Suggestions
+</A></li>
+ <LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B>
+ <a href="date.html#2655">[ date ]</a>
+ <a href="thread.html#2655">[ thread ]</a>
+ <a href="subject.html#2655">[ subject ]</a>
+ <a href="author.html#2655">[ author ]</a>
+ </LI>
+ </UL>
+
+<hr>
+<a href="https://www.mageia.org/mailman/listinfo/mageia-discuss">More information about the Mageia-discuss
+mailing list</a><br>
+</body></html>