[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
List: kde-kimageshop
Subject: Re: Docs.krita.org has been switched to sphinx!
From: Peter Bowmar <pbowmar () gmail ! com>
Date: 2018-05-28 10:25:50
Message-ID: CAEX_qcxSu4DKSGE-cmvyu-9qkL-3ArKX_8F9ekZ9cR58zME34A () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]
Hi Emmet,
I did a "test" edit of the Readme (with Wolthera's help via IRC) and now
that I've been through it once, I found it quite easy. However, I'm
familiar with Git and .rst (Sphinx) formatting.
While I do wish the committing of the "patches" was a bit easier (at work
we have a Git "on-push" script that automatically creates a pull request)
overall I didn't find it a problem. Hopefully I'll have time to do a lot
more proofreading.
As you say, it doesn't matter your proficiency as a writer, everyone needs
their writings proof-read, especially me :)
I'm not familiar with the "old" system but the new one (once I understood
it) is fairly painless, though could be streamlined a bit perhaps over time.
Cheers,
Peter B
On 28 May 2018 at 00:36, Emmet O'Neill <emmetoneill.pdx@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hey there. I have to say, the new docs tech seems really great so far and
> I love the look and layout.
>
> Well, my English is not perfect, and there's still a ton of pages which
>> have not
>> been formally proofread, so I am worried about those pages too.
>>
>
> Don't sell yourself short! Your English seems really great. At any rate,
> very few writers are "perfect" even in their native language, which is why
> even the pros use editors. I'm certainly not a professional writer or
> editor myself, but nevertheless I'd be happy to proofread anything that's
> sent my way.
>
> From my limited experience with it, my main issue with the *old* docs
> system (and, most likely, the main issue with the changes that I made :S)
> was that it wasn't a great system for planning changes which could be first
> submitted to an editor or reviewer for approval. There was a line somewhere
> or another about making "bold" edits, and the system gives the average user
> the ability to do so, but it really wasn't the *encouraged* way to
> contribute in the end. I agree with boud that sending documentation
> "patches" via Phabricator (or something similar) for review by the main
> documentation editors (a.k.a.: the people with push privileges) would be a
> good system. Senior editors like you would have push access for direct
> control, but even if you did want someone else to proofread your stuff
> before you push it, you could still submit it for peer review. Something
> with that kind of structure and hierarchy might make it less frustrating
> for reviewers and reviewees alike.
>
> Anyway, great job on all this so far.
> - Emmet
>
--
Cheers,
Peter B
[Attachment #3 (text/html)]
<div dir="ltr"><div>Hi Emmet,</div><div><br></div><div>I did a "test" edit \
of the Readme (with Wolthera's help via IRC) and now that I've been through \
it once, I found it quite easy. However, I'm familiar with Git and .rst (Sphinx) \
formatting.</div><div><br></div><div>While I do wish the committing of the \
"patches" was a bit easier (at work we have a Git "on-push" \
script that automatically creates a pull request) overall I didn't find it a \
problem. Hopefully I'll have time to do a lot more \
proofreading.</div><div><br></div><div>As you say, it doesn't matter your \
proficiency as a writer, everyone needs their writings proof-read, especially me \
:)</div><div><br></div><div>I'm not familiar with the "old" system but \
the new one (once I understood it) is fairly painless, though could be streamlined a \
bit perhaps over time.</div><div><br></div><div>Cheers,</div><div><br></div><div>Peter \
B<br></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 28 May 2018 \
at 00:36, Emmet O'Neill <span dir="ltr"><<a \
href="mailto:emmetoneill.pdx@gmail.com" \
target="_blank">emmetoneill.pdx@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote \
class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc \
solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div>Hey there. I have to say, the new docs \
tech seems really great so far and I love the look and layout.</div><span \
class=""><div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px \
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div>Well, my English \
is not perfect, and there's still a ton of pages which have not<br> been formally \
proofread, so I am worried about those pages \
too.<br></div></blockquote><div><br></div></span><div>Don't sell yourself short! \
Your English seems really great. At any rate, very few writers are \
"perfect" even in their native language, which is why even the pros use \
editors. I'm certainly not a professional writer or editor myself, but \
nevertheless I'd be happy to proofread anything that's sent my \
way.</div><div><br></div><div>From my limited experience with it, my main issue with \
the <i>old</i> docs system (and, most likely, the main issue with the changes that I \
made :S) was that it wasn't a great system for planning changes which could be \
first submitted to an editor or reviewer for approval. There was a line somewhere or \
another about making "bold" edits, and the system gives the average user \
the ability to do so, but it really wasn't the <i>encouraged</i> way to \
contribute in the end. I agree with boud that sending documentation \
"patches" via Phabricator (or something similar) for review by the main \
documentation editors (a.k.a.: the people with push privileges) would be a good \
system. Senior editors like you would have push access for direct control, but even \
if you did want someone else to proofread your stuff before you push it, you could \
still submit it for peer review. Something with that kind of structure and hierarchy \
might make it less frustrating for reviewers and reviewees \
alike.<br></div><div><br></div><div>Anyway, great job on all this so far.<span \
class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br></font></span></div><span \
class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><div><div class="gmail_extra">- \
Emmet<br></div></div></font></span></div> </blockquote></div><br><br \
clear="all"><br>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature" \
data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div \
dir="ltr">Cheers,<br><br>Peter B<br></div></div></div></div></div></div> </div>
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
Configure |
About |
News |
Add a list |
Sponsored by KoreLogic