[csw-maintainers] ITP: opencsw-policy

Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski maciej at opencsw.org
Fri Dec 31 10:50:44 CET 2010


No dia 29 de Dezembro de 2010 18:44, Peter FELECAN
<pfelecan at opencsw.org> escreveu:
> "Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski" <maciej at opencsw.org> writes:
>
>> The policy will be written as a collection of text files in a
>> lightweight markup.  I suggest asciidoc.  During build phase, asciidoc
>> files will be transformed into HTML files (also potentially PDF and
>> troff).  The package will install all files (in all formats) into
>> /opt/csw/share/doc/opencsw_policy.
>
> What's "asciidoc"? The figures are done doing "asciiart"? Seriously, I
> know TeX/LaTeX, texinfo or docbook (Debian use this), all of them
> convertible to all kind of output (PS, PDF, HTML, &c)

Asciidoc is usually the source from which TeX//LaTeX and docbook files
are generated, as a middle step to other formats.  As much as I like
LaTeX, I would like us to avoid typing in all the backslashes and
braces by hand.  Docbook is even worse.  If you take a second to look
at asciidoc, you'll see the idea behind it: it's a minimal markup
language, the document you write is basically a plain text file with
almost no markup.

If for some reason people don't like this particular one, there's also
reStructuredText, textile, markdown, and a couple others. Suggestions
welcome.

>> Example fragment of package prototype:
>>
>> d none /opt/csw/share/doc/opencsw_policy 0755 root bin
>> f none /opt/csw/share/doc/opencsw_policy/index.html 0755 root bin
>> f none /opt/csw/share/doc/opencsw_policy/index.txt 0755 root bin
>> f none /opt/csw/share/doc/opencsw_policy/license 0644 root bin
>>
>> The policy files will be licensed under the terms of GNU FDL.
>>
>> Changes to the policy will be posted to the maintainers (or the devel)
>> list for discussion.  The initial submissions will be ports of
>> existing documentation on the wiki and in Wordpress.  Any subsequent
>> changes will be also posted to the mailing list before submission.
>
> We need a policy mailing list which should be private.

What would be the purpose of that mailing list and why should it be
private?  The source updates will be public.

> IMO, a wiki is not adequate.
>
>> The policy package will have a maintainer, whose duty will be apply
>> posted patches after the consensus is reached.  The maintainer of the
>> policy package will have no discretionary control over the contents of
>> the package.  The ultimate say in the contents of the policy will
>> belong to the board.
>
> This kind of package is a very good candidate to an automatic packaging
> on a transition such as when a release is created in subversion (in
> the classical subversion structure of trunk/branch/tag/release).
>
>> How do you like this idea?  Do you have any comments or suggestions?
>
> Like a lot.
>
> IMO, the board should minimize its saying on the policies

Yes, this would be the last resort.

> and use a voting system.
> BTW, can we have an official voting system/procedure?

The online voting system we used had a couple of shortcomings (did not
understand time zones, for instance).  We can still use it though.  We
could start another thread to find and test online voting systems.


More information about the maintainers mailing list