[csw-maintainers] ITP: opencsw-policy

[Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski]

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.