discuss: [questions] WikiText format; Bugzilla-Guide; unpublished; suggested renaming
Subject:
Re: [questions] WikiText format; Bugzilla-Guide; unpublished;
suggested renaming
From:
"Martin A. Brown" ####@####.####
Date:
9 Feb 2016 16:07:05 +0000
Message-Id: <alpine.LSU.2.11.1602090802320.2025@znpeba.jbaqresebt.arg>
Hello,
>> 1. What to do with WikiText format and our one WikiText document?
>> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>> We have exactly one WikiText document (out of 501 active documents)
>> in our source repository, the howto/wikitext/WikiText-HOWTO.
>
>This was likely intended to be for our never-implemented lampadas
>project CMS. But WikiText may mean any wiki format, and the wiki
>used by Wikipedia, Mediawiki, claims it uses WikiText. But the
>Wikitext proposed by David Merrill is not the same as Mediawiki.
>So it seems that WikiText has different meanings and the Merrill
>WikiText might just be a never-used dialect only used by (or
>invented by) Merrill (I don't know for sure).
>>
>> What should we do with this WikiText document?
>>
>> David Merrill, our illustrious former leader, seems to be the author
>> both of this document and of a perl module backing the CLI utility,
>> wt2db (WikiText to DocBook).
>
>He was never our leader, but did a lot of (unrealized) coding for LDP.
>wt2db is sort of a misleading name, because Merrill said to use DocBook
>tags inside the wiki (if there was no wiki-markup for what you wanted)
>which makes conversion to DocBook trivial for such cases of markup.
>
>>
>> Should this be enqueued to the discussion of our future list of
>> supported formats?
>No. See above.
OK. We seem to be of the same opinion here. I've moved that
document into the 'retired' tree. [Will push to tLDP github later.]
Also, thanks for the background. I didn't know most of that.
>> 3. Unpublished source documents: should we contact authors?
>> ------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> We have several unpublished source documents. A few of them, I
>> believe are quite high quality (Intro-Linux and
>> Bash-Scripting-Introduction-HOWTO). I will also observe that one of
>> my owns documents (linux-ip) is also unpublished on tldp.org today.
>>
>> I propose contacting the authors and asking each if s/he is
>> interested in having the documentation published on tldp.org.
>>
>> Bash-Scripting-Introduction-HOWTO
>> (howto/docbook/Bash-Scripting-Introduction-HOWTO)
>> Consultants-Guide (guide/docbook/Consultants-Guide)
>> GNU-Build-System-HOWTO (howto/docbook/GNU-Build-System-HOWTO)
>> Intro-Linux (guide/docbook/Intro-Linux)
>> linux-ip (guide/docbook/linux-ip)
>> Linux-Networking (guide/docbook/Linux-Networking)
>> rpmupgrade (howto/docbook/rpmupgrade)
>> Tuning-Linux (guide/docbook/Tuning-Linux)
>>
>> [If nobody objects within a week or so, I'll do this.]
>
>I suggest that these be reviewed before publishing. There may be a
>good reason why they weren't published. The Consultants guide is
>likely obsolete, by the Poet who was sort of exploiting LDP to make
>money.
OK. I've retired the Consultants-Guide. [Will push to tLDP github
later.]
> It's on his website at Command Prompt. To get listed
>required a quid pro quo, which I think meant that you agreed to
>receive email ads. I recall doing sampling of a Bash Howto and
>rejecting it, but I think it was the "Advanced" one and not the one
>listed above.
>
>Lack of metadata on these files means we don't know why they were not
>published.
Yes. I perceive this as a core technical deficit.
-Martin
--
Martin A. Brown
http://linux-ip.net/
