[08:59] (enrico/#ubuntu-doc) not really a vendor branch: during the docteam bof, jdub said that the Gnome people were working on making it easy to rebrand the Gnome User's Guide, so we could work with them on that
[08:59] <froud> makes sense
[08:59] <enrico> Do you mind if I rename DocumentationTeamHome in DocumentationTeam?
[09:00] <froud> Its up to you. I am not stuck on anything. Remain flexible
[09:08] <enrico> froud: BTW, I remember from a previous IRC log that you and plovs talked about adding authorblurb to book chapters, to mark that one's working on it.  However, I didn't understand what was the agreement on that, so I coudln't cover it on the report
[09:09] <froud> goals and responsabilities are not defined clearly
[09:09] <froud> nobody knows who is doing what
[09:09] <froud> in the docs I thought it woul dbe good for people to add their name next to sections they want to do
[09:10] <froud> I would then use this to automatically make a list of what is in th epipe and what is not
[09:10] <froud> this way new people can also see what they may do
[09:10] <froud> I made a proposal in email
[09:10] <froud> but only plovs responds
[09:10] <enrico> We could try to do some step-by-step pages on contributing: "how to write text" (add your name as authorblurb, write things, commit).  "How to review" (read, post comments in the list, fix typos and commit, discuss bigger things in the list with the people in authorblurb)
[09:11] <froud> sure, but thiss is a general wiki thing
[09:11] <froud> we need traction on the docbook stuff
[09:11] <froud> In general I am not happy with the spead of work
[09:12] <enrico> But at least it would allow people who want to contribute to just start doing along a clear path, without needing to figure out anything.
[09:12] <froud> agreed
[09:12] <froud> hence I was building from the inside out
[09:12] <enrico> If I'm lazy and I want to contribute, I'm happy to follow something step by step
[09:12] <froud> but it needs for people to put their names in the source against sections they want to do
[09:13] <froud> writin a step by step is good
[09:13] <froud> and should be a goal
[09:13] <froud> but all this detracts from Hoary
[09:14] <enrico> well, "add authourblurb like this" could be in the step-by-step
[09:14] <froud> already I have spent more time Documenting the Documentation Project that I should
[09:14] <froud> and with all the confusions on the current goals I have now focused on the admin guide
[09:15] <froud> this because I can get traction
[09:15] <froud> on most projects you just need the for the hasty
[09:16] <froud> and peolple get stuck in
[09:16] <froud> and discuss on mail
[09:16] <froud> now discussion is good, but only if people do talk and respnd to one another
[09:16] <froud> for example
[09:17] <froud> it is frustrating spending an hour or more composing an RFC or Proposal to only get back one response
[09:17] <froud> eventually I think
[09:17] <froud> wtf
[09:17] <froud> why waste my time
[09:17] <froud> just do it and dont talk to anyone about what I am doing
[09:18] <froud> but this is not healthy in OSS projects
[09:18] <froud> excuse me if I am being a bit critical here
[09:18] <froud> but I think it is required
[09:19] <froud> without proposals/rfc's and responses of others opionions it is hard
[09:19] <froud> to organize and mobilize
[09:19] <enrico> you're quite right.  I think you're reasoning at a larger scale than the current docteam is: active people at the moment are roughly you, plovs, me, chrish, sivang (did I forget anyone?)
[09:20] <froud> I have a long author group list
[09:20] <froud> are they there?
[09:20] <froud> or just to get their name on the page?
[09:20] <enrico> How long since their last commit?
[09:20] <enrico> Maybe they did something some time ago, and became inactive
[09:20] <froud> just do svn log in th etrunk
[09:21] <froud> if you want o see what people did then do svn blame on a folder
[09:21] <froud> or file
[09:21] <enrico> Yes, I know subversion, but that was to tell you about what could be the real size of the team
[09:22] <froud> well I/we cant mandate anything
[09:22] <froud> but my point is people are not reponding on issues posted to the list
[09:23] <enrico> my guess on that is because we're quite a tiny team atm, and most of the people hang out on IRC anyway and have discussed such things on IRC with you
[09:24] <froud> irc goes away
[09:24] <enrico> if they haven't, next time they come to IRC you can say "hey, have you read that?  What do you think?"
[09:24] <froud> email stays
[09:24] <enrico> I know IRC goes away (and with the reports I try to make the most important things stay, since more things happen in IRC than in the list)
[09:24] <froud> point is email is a better log of what was decided to do
[09:24] <enrico> However, for smaller groups in which everyone hangs out in IRC, IRC can be the main mean of communication
[09:25] <enrico> Like "if froud didn't mention that on IRC, then he doesn't need further comments on the list"
[09:25] <enrico> I'm not saying that it's right, I'm guessing what's happening
[09:25] <froud> enrico, most of the list irc list is comprise don bots and people who doint contribute
[09:26] <enrico> But all the 5 names I mentioned you before hang out on IRC
[09:26] <froud> yes. they do
[09:26] <froud> but I dont want to discuss long issues in irc
[09:26] <froud> I use my email
[09:27] <froud> I can always make messages important and search email
[09:27] <froud> to remind me what exactly was said
[09:27] <enrico> I suggest you post things on the list, then ping people on IRC.  If I don't see answers to my mails, I chase people on IRC: that's the only way I can have answers, I realized
[09:27] <froud> sucks
[09:27] <enrico> I know, but I don't seem to be able to get things done otherwise :(
[09:28] <froud> well I have decided that I am just going to hack on. So I may drop out of site
[09:28] <froud> you will see my commits
[09:28] <froud> I wont waste my time writing rfc or proposals
[09:29] <enrico> I write down things on a mail, then after one or two days I don't get an answer I go on IRC and I start "did you see my mail with subject "xxx" 2 days ago?  when can we do that?"
[09:29] <froud> yes we discussed that
[09:29] <froud> my goal is hoary
[09:29] <froud> and as I see it the date is 21 feb
[09:30] <enrico> I agree.  It's time to hack.
[09:30] <enrico> I would so much prefer to be doing progress reports rather than tidying up proposals and consensuses
[09:30] <froud> so if u dont see me on irc or on the list, just do svn log
[09:30] <froud> well progress can only be obtained when people know and say what they are doing
[09:31] <enrico> :)  But please stay around on IRC... that's comfortable if someone wants to contact you
[09:31] <enrico> And it's cool having you around here!
[09:31] <froud> They can post to the list, perhaps that will force them to communicate
[09:32] <froud> the problem is that there is no alignment
[09:32] <enrico> Another item for the "step by step": how to contact the others.  Mail in the list, with a "if I don't see people disagreeing within 3 days, I'll go on"
[09:32] <enrico> what do you mean with alignment?
[09:32] <froud> good, agreed
[09:33] <froud> people need to take ownership and align on what they will do and on what they will help
[09:33] <froud> for example
[09:33] <froud> I may take sections about
[09:33] <froud> DNS, TCP/IP
[09:33] <froud> then I need people to review
[09:33] <froud> if I know who will help
[09:34] <froud> it would be easier
[09:35] <froud> frankly I am pissed and that is the time when I normally just kickout. But I have committed to much to do that now so I must ride the wave.
[09:35] <froud> I had a chat about this to mako
[09:36] <froud> I understand the conditions
[09:36] <froud> but must also decide whether this project is worth it or not
[09:36] <froud> IMHO, since I started the Admin Guide I must follow through
[09:36] <froud> and I intend to do that by hoary
[09:37] <froud> I was innitially intending to help build processes etc. But see that this is not working
[09:37] <froud> if it was making progress, I would continue
[09:38] <enrico> I'm sometimes pissed or sad to see that very few people are doing things.  When it happens, I just restrict my notion of the team to the few that are making commits, and then I'm happy we have a tiny team of active people.  Then I try to find out ways on how to get more people involved.
[09:39] <froud> you have the time for that, :-)
[09:40] <enrico> Well, yes, that's also what I'm paid for.  But it's interesting, nonetheless, to observe the dynamics of communities and see how things go
[09:40] <froud> sure
[09:40] <enrico> The cool part is that I cannot judge things, as they just go regardless of my judgements.  So I have a chance to see beyond the current understandings
[09:41] <enrico> Like, there may be few active people not because everyone's an asshole, but maybe because we don't advertise the project properly
[09:41] <enrico> And it may be that we don't advertise it properly because we have no easy and clear enough page to point people at
[09:42] <enrico> well, now we probably have some of such pages, so I'm considering advertising
[09:42] <froud> The main problem with documentation iin OSS is that OSS projects do not understand that it is part of a "go-to-market" strategy.
[09:42] <enrico> I'm quite enthousiast by your recent work, and I'm very committed in merging in the old things and in makign the step by step pages, then pointing people at them
[09:42] <froud> As you know there is very little go-to-market in OSS
[09:43] <froud> this is why there are so few open source authors
[09:43] <froud> the business case is easy to make for developers
[09:43] <froud> but not so easy for writers
[09:43] <enrico> what do you mean with business case?
[09:43] <froud> IMO, OSS projects should hire writers
[09:43] <froud> developers, most of them
[09:43] <froud> make money from services
[09:44] <froud> support, training, implimentation
[09:44] <froud> writers cant do  that
[09:44] <froud> the business case for developers has money behind it
[09:44] <enrico> good point
[09:44] <froud> for writers it currently does not
[09:44] <enrico> that's why most writers are developers that need to document their thing
[09:45] <froud> and developers cant write
[09:45] <froud> and if they are paid to write
[09:45] <enrico> another class of writers, however, could be users that want to improve things for themselves
[09:45] <froud> that time is not well spent
[09:45] <enrico> I'd like to try to give users a chance to do things
[09:45] <froud> enrico, as you know it takes lots of time to write docs
[09:46] <froud> properly
[09:46] <froud> most people will not commit that amount of free time
[09:46] <froud> I feel that OSS projects (large ones)
[09:46] <froud> need a core paid team
[09:47] <froud> the ensure progress
[09:47] <froud> they
[09:47] <froud> and accept contributions
[09:48] <froud> As an author, I sometimes question the motives of OSS projects in expecting to get free documentation for something that is essentially a go-to-market strategy
[09:49] <froud> go-to-market is a recent thing in the life of OSS
[09:49] <froud> a few years ago it never existed
[09:49] <froud> but in going to market, you need to build a complete project
[09:49] <froud> and product
[09:50] <enrico> uhm uhm.  Could it be that the wrong thing we're doing is trying to make books?  I'll explain:
[09:50] <froud> the software alone is not complete
[09:50] <froud> ok
[09:51] <enrico> quality books need quality writers and quite some quality assurance chain; they also need deadlines (they should come together with the software) and they get obsolete as software progresses.  This means that to have a quality book, a team must be paid regularly to create and update something within a given deadline
[09:51] <froud> agreed
[09:52] <enrico> However, there are people writing small tutorials and HOWTOs all the time for various reasons; two that get to my mind are show off what they managed to get, explain something to someone and then share it to others
[09:52] <enrico> So, if we want to harness and structure these volunteer contributions, the book for doesn't capture these pieces of informations very well, as it would be a book that collects autonomous, unrelated pieces of information
[09:53] <enrico> But we don't necessarily need to make books, stealing professional writers their wage
[09:53] <froud> agreed
[09:54] <enrico> So, I think at the QuickGuide: that's a collection of unrelated pieces of work, all different introductions to different applications.  That could be workable.
[09:54] <froud> disagree
[09:54] <enrico> Or another thing could be collecting all the HOWTOs that have been written in the Wiki and making a yelpable document out of them
[09:55] <froud> part agree
[09:55] <enrico> Or packaging the HOWTOs and tutorials that we find around together with the application itself
[09:55] <froud> disagree
[09:55] <enrico> Or similar other creative ways of taking what people like to write on their own and seeing if something cool can be done with that
[09:56] <froud> what is the ultimate objective of Ubuntu?
[09:56] <enrico> total world domination as usual, I guess?  Solving bug #1 in bugzilla?
[09:56] <froud> not possible
[09:57] <enrico> hello ChrisH!
[09:57] <enrico> froud: what do you mean?
[09:57] <froud> hello ChrisH 
[09:57] <froud> world domination is not possible in OSS
[09:57] <froud> the fabric of OSS ensures this
[09:57] <froud> So what is the ultimate objective of Ubuntu?
[09:58] <enrico> Sure, I was joking on that.  I think the goal is making a substainable company that pays developers to improve the world of free software in a way or another
[09:58] <froud> *developers*
[09:58] <enrico> I think I get what you mean.  Not only developers are required to improve the free software world, right?
[09:59] <froud> The ultimate objective of ubuntu is to create a revenue stream fro Canonical Ltd.
[09:59] <enrico> In 2 minutes I need to pick up the laundry, staying afk for around 5 minutes.  
[10:00] <froud> ok
[10:00] <enrico> yes, sustainable company means revenue stream
[10:00] <froud> Mark Shuttleworth is not stupid
[10:00] <froud> he knows that OSS is the ceapest way to develop sofwtare
[10:01] <froud> Canonical makes money by probviding services around Ubuntu
[10:01] <froud> at present the business in sponsoring (investing)
[10:01] <froud> the business plan is long
[10:01] <froud> a number of years
[10:02] <froud> Thi si sfine
[10:02] <froud> but to build a platform that "Just works"
[10:02] <froud> requires quality
[10:02] <froud> ateention to usability
[10:02] <froud> training
[10:02] <froud> support
[10:03] <froud> docs are about knowledge transfer, they are the first line of support
[10:03] <froud> most 'users' dont understand HOWTO's
[10:03] <enrico> actually quality and usabilty are the even firster lines of support
[10:03] <froud> they dont understand developer docs
[10:03] <froud> yes, integral to the product
[10:03] <froud> to create a complete product you need it all
[10:04] <froud> you need Certification
[10:04] <froud> training engineers
[10:04] <froud> trained trainers
[10:04] <froud> only then will large business adopt
[10:04] <froud> SuSE/Novell has this right
[10:05] <enrico> RedHat is doing the same
[10:05] <froud> Yes but with Novell enterprises have local support from the mother company
[10:05] <enrico> they have trained engineers that are allocated to solve the problems of the large businesses they support
[10:05] <froud> try live in South africa and get support from RH
[10:06] <froud> you cant
[10:06] <enrico> Maybe RH doesn't target SA.  I know they do this with US and at least some of the EU
[10:06] <enrico> But yes, I see the point
[10:06] <froud> For ubuntu to succeed
[10:06] <enrico> I've started telling people that the best way to help free software is start a company and make money doing support
[10:06] <froud> it needs to build a complete project
[10:07] <froud> a complete product
[10:07] <froud> ok so how do writers make money
[10:07] <froud> we have to live
[10:08] <enrico> Either you work on your own, or you are hired by someone
[10:08] <enrico> If you work on your own, you create a product and then get money from your target to make it evolve
[10:08] <froud> people open support companies and have a first line of support in the docs, can I get a royalty
[10:09] <froud> not likely
[10:09] <froud> ok so as a writer, what would your product be to achieve that objective
[10:10] <enrico> a book, an interactive cdrom, an expert system, some useful piece of documentation
[10:10] <froud> ok but then I will not OSS that
[10:10] <froud> if I do it is free to use by all
[10:11] <enrico> You can OSS it and still get money to support it, or customize it to local needs
[10:11] <froud> where's the money?
[10:11] <froud> everybody can do that
[10:11] <froud> why do they need me
[10:11] <enrico> Like, get paid to extend your OOo guide to cover the local needs of an enterprise, by going there and study how they work
[10:11] <enrico> everybody can do that with software, too
[10:11] <froud> the whol epoint of OSS is that they can get the source
[10:12] <froud> yes, they can
[10:12] <froud> but everybody thinks they are a writer
[10:12] <froud> not everybody thinks they are a dev
[10:12] <froud> or can impliemnt
[10:12] <enrico> oh, if you look at PHP software repositories you'll find lots of people thinks they are a dev
[10:13] <enrico> or look at ASP e-commerce solutions
[10:13] <froud> sure and what do you get
[10:13] <enrico> poor quality
[10:13] <froud> If I understand this right, there must have been a reason for Mark Shuttleworth to want to build ubuntu
[10:14] <froud> why not just take an existing distro
[10:14] <froud> why do we need a new distro
[10:14] <enrico> what distro would you have taken?
[10:14] <enrico> laundry, bbiab
[10:14] <froud> well mandrake is doing a good desktop job
[10:14] <froud> ok bye
[10:15] <enrico> But mandrake's not Debian
[10:15] <froud> does that really matter
[10:15] <enrico> Appearently, it does
[10:15] <froud> the users dont care
[10:15] <enrico> Maybe just as a quirk from Mark
[10:15] <froud> why go to all the trouble
[10:16] <froud> I dont think it is a quirk
[10:16] <enrico> Maybe because Debian was potentially much better and only needed that small bit of a cleaning
[10:16] <froud> a person that has "There be dragons" written on his web site has done shome serious thinking and reading
[10:17] <froud> no there be money here
[10:17] <froud> Canonical wants a quality product
[10:17] <froud> they call there own
[10:17] <froud> if they took just another distro
[10:17] <froud> they would just be a shop
[10:18] <froud> well to be continued perhaps
[10:25] <enrico> I"m back
[10:26] <froud> geeze that was quick
[10:26] <froud> you have a laundromat next door?
[10:26] <enrico> laundry here is hung in bamboo sticks: you put the basket on the ground, pull down the stick, shake it and everything falls on the basket :)
[10:27] <froud> cool
[10:28] <froud> well, I am going back to respond to your messages and then hack the admin guide.
[10:28] <froud> just wish svn was not down, again
[10:28] <enrico> is it down?  bu
[10:29] <enrico> Tuesday I'll hear from Elmo again.  Yesterday I gave him a dump and some hooks so that he can play around with subversion server-side
[10:29] <froud> hmm, you try maybe its just the connectivity from South AFrica
[10:30] <froud> yes, saw that message sounds good
[10:30] <enrico> svn works now
[10:30] <enrico> just tried an update
[10:30] <froud> may be it is just the connectivity from here
[10:31] <froud> oh hold on here it is :-)
[10:39] <enrico> froud: can I take the Docbook 4.3 item away from DocteamWishlist?  (or move it to a solved part) ?
[10:39] <froud> sure, we have all 4.3 now
[10:42] <enrico> froud: moved.  Thanks!
[11:00] <enrico> froud: I merged the descriptions from the FAQ into DocteamProjects
[11:01] <froud> looking
[11:02] <enrico> I'm adding a desc of the AdminGuide
[11:02] <enrico> done
[11:05] <froud> enrico, nice, I see a few touches needed in text, but will do those
[11:06] <froud> what about the internationalization?
[11:06] <_d4vid> hi all
[11:07] <froud> hello _d4vid 
[11:07] <froud> enrico, why do we duplicate content under the FAQ?
[11:08] <froud> tis better to link between the pages
[11:08] <froud> e.g. What is being worked on?
[11:09] <enrico> I wanted to put something just to avoid the frustration of finding a link but not an answer; however with this question you convinced me to just list the names of the things and link to DocteamProjects.  I'm doing it now...
[11:14] <enrico> done
[11:18] <froud> much better :-)
[11:18] <froud> always easier to maintain in one place and link to it in various contexts
[11:19] <froud> enrico, do we really want to port GNOME documentation
[11:22] <enrico> That'd be important afaik, since ubuntu would be one of the main distros featuring gnome
[11:23] <froud> yes but why port
[11:23] <froud> *port*
[11:25] <froud> Seems to me, GOME has a code base
[11:25] <froud> we should reuse it 
[11:25] <enrico> Port does not make much sense, yes.  Rebrand does
[11:25] <enrico> Ubuntu doesn't make many modifications to Gnome anyway
[11:25] <froud> to accelerate doc dev
[11:25] <froud> we should consider a process akin to vendor drops
[11:26] <froud> however, mako and others have said that there are problems with vendor drops
[11:26] <froud> I plan to test it locally
[11:26] <froud> GNOME is in CVS
[11:26] <froud> we're in SVN
[11:26] <froud> that further compunds things
[11:27] <froud> but I see they have svn_load_dirs.pl
[11:27] <froud> this could solve much of the overhead
[11:29] <froud> the alternative is to maintain symlink to a local co on each authors host
[11:29] <enrico> No, please... I suggest you ask jdub about the rebranding support they want to build into gnome docs upstream, and we work with them
[11:29] <froud> yes we can do the same from our repos
[11:29] <froud> fact is everything ubuntu docs related can take place upstream
[11:30] <froud> what's left
[11:30] <froud> one must seriously ask the question, "Do we need core docs?"
[11:31] <enrico> As I see it, we do need the About Ubuntu page, the Quick Guide and the rebranding of the Gnome User's Guide
[11:31] <enrico> Those don't exist upstream or require us to work with upstraem
[11:32] <enrico> I don't say anything about the User's Guide and the Admin Guide, because they came out spontaneously
[11:32] <froud> Yes
[11:33] <enrico> Same as the FAQ Guide.  But the FAQ Guide has been finished, it's cool, wow!
[11:33] <froud> The only value in having our own versions is if we have a difference between ubuntu and upstream
[11:33] <froud> thanks to plovs
[11:34] <enrico> The about ubuntu page has been "finished", but still misses a make target that generates it
[11:34] <froud> yes, I have this as a bug
[11:35] <enrico> So, for what hoary is concerned, we miss the Quick Guide
[11:37] <froud> yes, but much of quick guide stuff can be reused form GNOME
[11:38] <enrico> Can you give me an example in Gnome?
[11:39] <froud> well as I understand QG, its a short intro to the app and a screen capture
[11:39] <froud> this exists in all GMOME docs
[11:40] <enrico> Could you give me a link?
[11:41] <froud> in cvs?
[11:42] <enrico> don't they have them in the web?
[11:44] <froud> yes, but I never look at it
[11:44] <froud> :-)
[11:44] <froud> just the code ?
[11:46] <froud> grrrr. never can find anything on GNOME site
[11:49] <froud> enrico, the other way is to use the docs from the app source like GAIM
[11:49] <froud> but that means  many vendor drops
[11:50] <enrico> Do you have a CVS example, then?
[11:50] <froud> hold getting it
[11:51] <enrico> I'd like to look at it to see if they are already doing a short useful self-contained description: I'm used at seeing introductions to further text rather than small, self-contained intros.
[11:52] <froud> here is a generic example from their tutorial src
[11:52] <froud> <sect2 id="aboutex">
[11:52] <froud>    <title>About this Document and gdp-example2</title>
[11:52] <froud>    <indexterm>
[11:52] <froud>     <primary>ScrollKeeper</primary>
[11:52] <froud>     <secondary>Examples</secondary>
[11:52] <froud>     <tertiary>gdp-example2</tertiary>
[11:52] <froud>    </indexterm>
[11:52] <froud>    <para>
[11:52] <froud>     The package <filename>gdp-example2</filename> illustrates how
[11:52] <froud>     to set up a GNOME 2 package to properly install its documentation and OMF
[11:52] <froud>     files and register them with ScrollKeeper.  This document is part
[11:52] <froud>     of the <filename>gdp-example2</filename> package and explains what the
[11:52] <froud>     important files in the package are.  This document also provides 
[11:52] <froud>     step-by-step instructions on how to modify an existing package to include
[11:52] <froud>     the documentation files and build instructions.
[11:52] <froud>    </para>
[11:52] <froud>    <para>
[11:52] <froud>     That this document is meant to be a brief explanation and tutorial
[11:52] <froud>     on what needs to be done.  For more information, look inside the 
[11:52] <froud>     various files in this package or contact the authors.
[11:52] <froud>    </para>
[11:52] <froud>    <para>
[11:52] <froud>     This package is maintained in <ulink type="http"
[11:53] <froud>     url="http://www.gnome.org/">GNOME</ulink> CVS for
[11:53] <froud>     in the <filename
[11:53] <froud>     class="directory">gnome-docu</filename> module under 
[11:53] <froud>     <filename class="directory">gnome-docu/gdp/</filename>.
[11:53] <froud>    </para>
[11:53] <froud>   </sect2>
[11:53] <froud> you want to use pastebin
[11:54] <enrico> pastebin?
[11:54] <enrico> Anyway, from that intro, that document is a bit too much.
[11:54] <enrico> (it seems to me)
[11:55] <enrico> The quick guide shouldn't really spend too much time teaching how to use things.  More like telling what could be done with things.
[11:55] <froud> yes, but you can get only what you need
[11:55] <enrico> Maybe I should write a page as an example
[11:55] <froud> that would be good
[11:56] <enrico> The other question is: is it simpler to pull in all the bits we need or to just write?
[11:56] <froud> from a maintenance perspective it is better to use a vendor drop
[11:57] <enrico> I imagine the QuickGuide would be rewritten in most parts for every Ubuntu release
[11:58] <froud> sure that's why you want to reuse
[11:58] <enrico> froud: [different topic]  Since every product page (AboutUbuntuPage, QuickGuide and so on) has a status section, do we really need DocteamStatus?  I was considering aggregating it with DocteamProjects, saying that the link also contains status info
[12:00] <froud> each doc has a revisionhistory
[12:00] <froud> no status
[12:00] <froud> but that revision history is not the same as status
[12:01] <froud> over at GNOME they maintain a document owner list
[12:01] <froud> and KDE to
[12:01] <enrico> I try to  explain myself better: http://www.ubuntulinux.org/wiki/QuickGuide has a "Status" section, and DocteamStatus claims to be linking to just that
[12:02] <froud> There is too much in that spec
[12:02] <enrico> http://www.ubuntulinux.org/wiki/FAQGuide has a better status section
[12:02] <enrico> http://www.ubuntulinux.org/wiki/AboutUbuntuPage even better
[12:02] <froud> also to much
[12:02] <enrico> there is not much in QuickGuide because not much work in it has taken place yet :)
[12:03] <froud> why have the outline there
[12:03] <enrico> No reason to have hte outline, can be fixed, but
[12:03] <froud> doc spec is short to the point
[12:03] <froud> status is something long
[12:03] <froud> each section has a staus
[12:03] <enrico> uhm... who would maintain that?
[12:03] <froud> and that is agregated to give the overall stat
[12:04] <froud> automatic if you read the message I sent. I will expand on it in a response
[12:04] <enrico> Unless it could be autogenerated from docbook tags and svn commits, I see problems in maintaining tags by hand
[12:04] <enrico> Ok, I'll wait for the response then
[12:04] <froud> I have a meeting now. must go
[12:05] <enrico> dinnertime here.  brb
[12:31] <enrico> Busy evening is going to be.  I'll resume works tomorrow.  Tomorrow I'll be working on Ubuntu the whole day
[12:31] <enrico> Bye!
[07:59] <_d4vid> play HIM - You Are the One.mp3