Message: previous - next
Month: November 2011

Re: [trinity-devel] Improving the Web Site and Adding Documentation

From: "Timothy Pearson" <kb9vqf@...>
Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2011 13:50:53 -0600
> Do we have access to the old KDE web site pages? The Trinity web site
> provides no package description pages like the old KDE web site. I think
> we could use such pages.
> I'm no HTML expert but if we have an archive of the old kde web site I am
> willing to help massage the old pages into Trinity pages.
> Second, I noticed when building the 3.5.13 packages from tarballs that
> some of the old /usr/doc files were not part of the binary packages. Fair
> enough, most of that was stale and useless. However, there is a readme
> file in every package and the file says nothing more than to visit the
> wiki to learn how to build each package. The wiki is lacking in specific
> package information. I can update the wiki but I don't know what is
> relevant. That is, I had to heavily patch a few 3.5.13 packages in
> Slackware, but I don't know whether that is true for other distros. I had
> to do some serious head scratching to get some packages to build and
> having specific information would have helped.
> Perhaps an improved approach is to create a wiki page for each package
> with instructions for building. That documentation should be duplicated in
> the package readme file. Many of the pages will be repetitive because they
> require nothing different or unique. Or create individual pages only for
> those packages that require different build options. Certainly any package
> that requires one or more patches needs that information.
> Lastly, long ago I mentioned the idea of a Trinity user's guide. Something
> that allows multiple output options, such as HTML, and PDF. Packagers
> could add a desktop icon to the generic user profile and first time users
> would see the icon right away. Several distro maintainers do this and I
> always liked the idea. The user's guide would be part of the Trinity web
> site too. I am willing to help.
> I'm not demanding anything :) --- just trying to start conversations. I
> welcome that GIT and bug quashing have priority for 3.5.14. I want that to
> succeed --- especially the bug quashing. :) I think documentation is
> something that can grow and mature on the side. Do we need a plan?

I tend to agree, and yes we do need a plan.  Why don't you add this as a
topic for the Nov. 15 meeting on the Etherpad at