(10:53:55 AM) The topic for #deegree is: Welcome to deegree, an OSGeo project. Visit the main project page at http://deegree.org and our wiki at http://wiki.deegree.org with lots of extra info. Check out a running system at http://demo.deegree.org and follow us on twitter @deegree_org.
(10:53:55 AM) mode (+o ndrs) by ChanServ
(10:54:01 AM) Users on #deegree: @ndrs @ChanServ
(01:37:37 PM) jwilden [~jwilden@static-87-79-89-38.netcologne.de] entered the room.
(02:26:39 PM) markusschneider [~markus@ip-95-223-248-129.unitymediagroup.de] entered the room.
(02:27:36 PM) copierrj [~chatzilla@dsl-083-247-008-136.solcon.nl] entered the room.
(02:27:57 PM) markusschneider: Wiki page for today's meeting: http://wiki.deegree.org/deegreeWiki/TmcMeeting/TmcMeeting20120214
(02:28:11 PM) markusschneider: @andreas: are you recording again?
(02:32:51 PM) jwilden: I think Thorsten will be there soon, he just entered the office
(02:33:21 PM) ndrs: yes, I'm recording
(02:34:08 PM) markusschneider: great
(02:36:03 PM) tfr42 [~chatzilla@static-87-79-89-38.netcologne.de] entered the room.
(02:36:09 PM) tfr42: Hello!
(02:36:16 PM) jwilden: Hi
(02:36:24 PM) copierrj: hi
(02:36:28 PM) jwilden: So we are complete, can we start?
(02:36:33 PM) markusschneider: http://webchat.freenode.net/
(02:36:58 PM) markusschneider: Wiki page: http://wiki.deegree.org/deegreeWiki/TmcMeeting/TmcMeeting20120214
(02:37:08 PM) markusschneider: Please have a look at the agenda.
(02:37:37 PM) markusschneider: Can we begin?
(02:37:45 PM) jwilden: Yes!
(02:37:50 PM) tfr42: Yes, please!
(02:37:52 PM) copierrj: ok
(02:38:11 PM) markusschneider: great. welcome everybody. Andreas?
(02:38:24 PM) ndrs: yes, go ahead...
(02:38:36 PM) markusschneider: anything missing on the agenda?
(02:38:47 PM) jwilden: I don't think so
(02:38:51 PM) copierrj: no
(02:39:08 PM) markusschneider: i would suggest to do the items one-by-one then.
(02:39:13 PM) markusschneider: 1. Move iGeoDesktop to SVN toplevel
(02:39:25 PM) markusschneider: https://wald.intevation.org/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=6289&group_id=27&atid=303
(02:39:33 PM) jwilden: Yes, that was my request
(02:39:46 PM) markusschneider: did you see my comment?
(02:39:51 PM) ndrs: I have to agree with markusschneider, it seems to be very deegree2 dependent
(02:40:42 PM) ndrs: nevertheless, if we move to another scm one day, I'd recommend a separate one for iGeoDesktop, as it's a standalone app
(02:40:53 PM) copierrj: is igeodesktop moving toward deegree3 in the near future?
(02:41:07 PM) ndrs: I'm not aware of concrete plans
(02:41:07 PM) jwilden: One of the targets of the refactoring of igeodesktop is to seperate it from all deegree 2 code
(02:41:18 PM) markusschneider: imho, the question is whether the svn structure should follow a technology (deegree2/3) or product oriented approach...
(02:41:21 PM) jwilden: yes @ copierrj
(02:41:48 PM) markusschneider: but then it will be dependend on deegree 3, right?
(02:41:56 PM) jwilden: that is kinda true...
(02:42:10 PM) copierrj: depend != part of, imho
(02:42:25 PM) markusschneider: i cannot imagine that it can be *independent* from both deegree 2 or 3
(02:42:30 PM) markusschneider: right
(02:42:32 PM) tfr42: First, iGeoDesktop uses a deegree implementation
(02:43:03 PM) tfr42: currently iGeoDesktop depends on deegree 2 and is heavily bundled with that kind of legacy code.
(02:43:32 PM) markusschneider: right. although it already has a clean maven dependency to deegree 2, right?
(02:44:24 PM) tfr42: The plan is to encapsulate all use relationships from iGeoDesktop to deegree core and then to relace deegree with the recent version of deegree 3
(02:44:42 PM) ndrs: there are a lot of deegree2 based viewer components, think of the 'viewer', the OpenJUMP deegree plugin, iGeoPortal
(02:45:00 PM) tfr42: This is also correct.
(02:45:09 PM) ndrs: tfr42: that might prove a difficult task
(02:45:55 PM) tfr42: Sure, nothing is simple when starting from the current code base of iGeoDesktop
(02:45:58 PM) ndrs: I think for consistency it would be best to leave it within the deegree2 folder for the time being. Once the move/split is being undertaken, I suggest to branch to toplevel
(02:46:12 PM) ndrs: or to a separate scm
(02:46:17 PM) markusschneider: sounds reasonable...
(02:46:27 PM) jwilden: Yes
(02:47:09 PM) copierrj: +1
(02:47:18 PM) markusschneider: +1
(02:48:03 PM) markusschneider: @tfr42: can you live with this?
(02:48:06 PM) tfr42: What about iGeoPortal and the OpenJUMP plugin?
(02:48:16 PM) markusschneider: same here, imho
(02:48:22 PM) ndrs: well
(02:48:33 PM) ndrs: IMHO the OpenJUMP plugin will die with deegree2
(02:48:34 PM) tfr42: For each client a separate SVN repo?
(02:48:55 PM) markusschneider: at the moment everything is in one repo
(02:49:03 PM) markusschneider: technically
(02:49:04 PM) ndrs: tfr42: that's something I'd favour
(02:49:41 PM) markusschneider: torsten: you have concerns?
(02:50:09 PM) tfr42: no, only asking. But my choice 'ld be a repo per application
(02:50:20 PM) jwilden: Agreed.
(02:50:26 PM) markusschneider: I believe separation is a good thing, but at the moment the project should first sort out what is actually going to stay for good...
(02:51:15 PM) jwilden: Isn't this happening right now?!
(02:51:20 PM) markusschneider: the current simple deegree2/3 separation in the repo was basically done to make things more manageable
(02:51:27 PM) markusschneider: right
(02:51:30 PM) markusschneider: more concerns?
(02:52:02 PM) markusschneider: i would suggest to clarify (PSC/TMC) what components we actually want to maintain in the future.
(02:52:18 PM) jwilden: Action item?
(02:52:26 PM) tfr42: good!
(02:52:37 PM) markusschneider: I can do it.
(02:52:51 PM) jwilden: +1
(02:53:17 PM) ndrs: +1
(02:53:20 PM) markusschneider: So we agree to keep everything as it is (for now). But we will reconsider the structure in the future.
(02:53:21 PM) copierrj: +1
(02:53:25 PM) markusschneider: great.
(02:53:30 PM) jwilden: Can you also make a ticket for the psc?
(02:53:45 PM) markusschneider: That would be the action item.
(02:53:54 PM) jwilden: Oh ok...
(02:54:14 PM) markusschneider: i suggest to look at "deegree 3 SOS documentation" now, as it is somewhat related.
(02:54:26 PM) markusschneider: https://wald.intevation.org/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=6295&group_id=27&atid=303
(02:54:27 PM) jwilden: But I think we should also think about what we want to maintain in the future
(02:54:48 PM) markusschneider: what to you mean?
(02:54:56 PM) markusschneider: compile a list of modules an their importance?
(02:55:33 PM) jwilden: I mean which components we think are valueable and should be maintained and compare our suggestions with those of the psc
(02:55:42 PM) jwilden: yes somethiong like that
(02:56:08 PM) markusschneider: for deegree 3, we probably should compile a list of modules first...
(02:56:25 PM) markusschneider: as deegree 3 consists of dozens of modules itself
(02:56:31 PM) jwilden: agreed
(02:56:43 PM) markusschneider: make a wiki page for deegree 3 modules?
(02:57:00 PM) jwilden: yes, action item?
(02:57:04 PM) markusschneider: and for deegree 2...
(02:57:08 PM) tfr42: may I suggest that the TMC should define strict rules which must be fulfilled to mark a package/module stable.
(02:57:09 PM) markusschneider: yep.
(02:57:09 PM) ndrs: I'm not sure we should do that on module level, better would be component
(02:57:48 PM) tfr42: isn't a maven module a component in terms of an architectural component?
(02:58:00 PM) ndrs: well, have a look at the SOS
(02:58:07 PM) markusschneider: @tfr42: agreed
(02:58:17 PM) ndrs: it consists of a core module, datastore module(s) and a service module
(02:58:37 PM) ndrs: no SOS -> no modules
(02:59:05 PM) markusschneider: i believe it's probably a good idea to reflect both views (architectural/logical) on the page
(02:59:08 PM) jwilden: So a list of components is needed as well as a list of modules
(02:59:10 PM) jwilden: yes
(02:59:52 PM) markusschneider: but the maven modules are pretty clean already and map quite well to "logical" deegree components
(03:00:10 PM) markusschneider: @tfr42: or do you have a better word for that
(03:00:50 PM) tfr42: no, I am fine with Maven Module := component and vice versa.
(03:01:05 PM) jwilden: Me too
(03:01:28 PM) markusschneider: action item 1 would then be to compile a list of technical (Maven) modules deegree 2 and 3
(03:01:36 PM) jwilden: +1
(03:01:45 PM) copierrj: +1
(03:02:08 PM) markusschneider: action item 2: define rules for module status
(03:02:20 PM) ndrs: http://buildserver.lat-lon.de/hudson/job/deegree-3.2/modules
(03:02:39 PM) markusschneider: unfortunately, in a strict sense, almost no module will probably be stable
(03:03:18 PM) markusschneider: nrds: thanks
(03:03:49 PM) markusschneider: I believe the page should also contain information (one sentence) on what the module does
(03:03:59 PM) copierrj: idea: assign a quality/completeness number to every module?
(03:04:05 PM) ndrs: well, a definition of stable is one thing, but don't we need to decide on maintained/unmaintained first?
(03:04:17 PM) jwilden: Yes @ ndrs
(03:04:19 PM) markusschneider: both agreed.
(03:04:47 PM) ndrs: a descriptive text on each module could also be put into the respective pom.xml
(03:04:48 PM) markusschneider: i would suggest to make a table with "module name/description/maintained/status"
(03:04:56 PM) markusschneider: @ndrs: right
(03:04:59 PM) markusschneider: and it should be
(03:05:20 PM) jwilden: module name/description/maintained/status sounds good
(03:05:22 PM) markusschneider: until action item 2 is done, we could keep to our guts feeling...
(03:05:29 PM) markusschneider: better than nothing
(03:05:52 PM) markusschneider: just as a first step
(03:05:58 PM) ndrs: +1
(03:06:15 PM) jwilden: +1
(03:06:18 PM) copierrj: +1
(03:06:27 PM) markusschneider: +1
(03:06:30 PM) markusschneider: settled then
(03:06:34 PM) markusschneider: action item 1?
(03:06:42 PM) markusschneider: i can help here
(03:06:59 PM) markusschneider: anybody else wants to do it?
(03:07:11 PM) jwilden: <==
(03:07:20 PM) markusschneider: ???
(03:07:27 PM) jwilden: I can do it :)
(03:07:38 PM) markusschneider: great. our item then?
(03:07:49 PM) markusschneider: ok. item 2 is harder...
(03:07:57 PM) markusschneider: anybody?
(03:08:11 PM) markusschneider: @tfr42: do you want to help here?
(03:08:35 PM) markusschneider: if this is ok with everybody...
(03:08:47 PM) tfr42: I am very sorry, but due to a lack of free time this week I can not contribute here
(03:09:00 PM) markusschneider: i believe this will not happen this week...
(03:09:06 PM) jwilden: Me neither
(03:09:07 PM) ndrs: I also don't think it's just an action item for one person
(03:09:13 PM) ndrs: we should collect thoughts first
(03:09:16 PM) markusschneider: agreed
(03:09:24 PM) copierrj: wiki page?
(03:09:25 PM) ndrs: a Wiki page with suggestions?
(03:09:33 PM) jwilden: Action item 1 will be finished until the next TMC-meeting, action item 2 could take a month or something
(03:09:42 PM) jwilden: Yes wiki page
(03:09:48 PM) markusschneider: good.
(03:10:12 PM) markusschneider: @jwilden: you prepare the wiki page?
(03:10:16 PM) jwilden: yes
(03:10:39 PM) markusschneider: good. next: https://wald.intevation.org/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=6295&group_id=27&atid=303
(03:11:18 PM) markusschneider: according to http://wiki.deegree.org/deegreeWiki/deegree3/OGCWebServices johannes is the maintainer...
(03:11:26 PM) markusschneider: how did that happen, btw?
(03:11:34 PM) jwilden: I have no idea
(03:11:37 PM) jwilden: ...
(03:11:46 PM) markusschneider: this should have been discussed at the summit...
(03:11:51 PM) markusschneider: but we didn't get to it
(03:12:02 PM) markusschneider: but people are really persistent about the damn thing
(03:12:06 PM) markusschneider: :-)
(03:12:18 PM) jwilden: So what do we do now?
(03:12:32 PM) markusschneider: I have two things in mind:
(03:12:51 PM) markusschneider: 1. Bring the wiki page up-to-date so it can be used with a recent build
(03:13:30 PM) markusschneider: 2. Add Maven profiles to deegree-webservices so it includes the unmaintained services (SOS, WCS, WPVS).
(03:13:56 PM) jwilden: I would start with SOS only
(03:14:01 PM) markusschneider: I am not sure if we really need 2.
(03:14:22 PM) jwilden: And +1 for updating the wiki page
(03:14:26 PM) markusschneider: putting the dependencies into the modules directory should work as well
(03:14:43 PM) markusschneider: but the sos workspace needs updating, AFAIK
(03:14:47 PM) ndrs: yes, I'm against 2.
(03:15:07 PM) markusschneider: shall we vote on 2?
(03:15:12 PM) ndrs: once we have the workspace registry going, we can do 'experimental' or 'unstable' workspaces
(03:15:23 PM) jwilden: true @ ndrs
(03:15:31 PM) markusschneider: agreed. when is this going to happen exactly?
(03:15:38 PM) ndrs: and indeed, the non-standard modules are included in the modules directories anyway
(03:15:39 PM) jwilden: but until then, we sould postpone this
(03:15:59 PM) ndrs: a couple of weeks, 1-3 Months
(03:16:00 PM) jwilden: the registry will hopefully be finished end of next month
(03:16:01 PM) markusschneider: but what do we tell people on the ml *now*
(03:16:03 PM) ndrs: next year ;-)
(03:16:19 PM) markusschneider: to me, this is quite frustrating...
(03:16:43 PM) markusschneider: i hate to tell people "i don't know"
(03:16:43 PM) ndrs: yes, well, people can still import the URL to the deployed SOS workspace manually right now
(03:16:56 PM) ndrs: if you want, you can try it out right now
(03:17:00 PM) markusschneider: but we need minimal instructions...
(03:17:06 PM) markusschneider: on the wiki page...
(03:17:19 PM) markusschneider: action item for you then?
(03:17:25 PM) markusschneider: :-)
(03:17:42 PM) ndrs: got no time...
(03:17:55 PM) markusschneider: same here.
(03:18:00 PM) jwilden: ditto
(03:18:13 PM) markusschneider: but we should update the sos wiki page so people don't come asking all the time.
(03:18:14 PM) copierrj: don't know anything about sos...
(03:18:20 PM) jwilden: me neither
(03:18:21 PM) markusschneider: even if it doesn't work...
(03:18:35 PM) markusschneider: at least people should be able to find that information....
(03:18:44 PM) jwilden: and until it is decided if the sos is maintained or not, we shouldn't put efford into it
(03:19:30 PM) markusschneider: ok. shall i put a big warning on the SOS/WPVS/WCS documentation pages then?
(03:19:38 PM) jwilden: yes please!
(03:19:42 PM) markusschneider: but people will still come asking...
(03:19:43 PM) ndrs: well, if you want to answer the people, the compliance workspace should work out of the box
(03:19:45 PM) markusschneider: in private mail
(03:20:05 PM) jwilden: Ask them for funding ;)
(03:20:28 PM) markusschneider: ok. big warning and inform the psc about the current mess?
(03:20:38 PM) jwilden: +1
(03:21:02 PM) ndrs: +1
(03:21:05 PM) copierrj: +1
(03:21:11 PM) markusschneider: good.
(03:21:30 PM) markusschneider: Regular pre-release builds/quality assurance: https://wald.intevation.org/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=6294&group_id=27&atid=303
(03:21:53 PM) ndrs: jwilden and I still have the action item
(03:21:54 PM) jwilden: Create a "checklist"
(03:22:12 PM) jwilden: ?!
(03:22:31 PM) markusschneider: i cannot connect to the tracker!?
(03:22:37 PM) markusschneider: do you see it?
(03:22:41 PM) ndrs: the action item about automated deployment tests
(03:23:03 PM) ndrs: no, tracker seems to be gone
(03:23:10 PM) markusschneider: :-)
(03:23:12 PM) jwilden: Unrelated to our action item is the release cycle
(03:23:31 PM) jwilden: We should really get back on track an release every 2 weeks
(03:23:49 PM) markusschneider: opinions on the strict cycle?
(03:23:53 PM) markusschneider: +1
(03:23:55 PM) ndrs: +1
(03:24:14 PM) ndrs: we can still make an exception if we all agree (eg. if nothing really happened in the code)
(03:24:32 PM) jwilden: +1
(03:24:42 PM) markusschneider: reijer?
(03:24:54 PM) copierrj: +1
(03:25:13 PM) markusschneider: how do we ensure that the build happens then?
(03:25:29 PM) markusschneider: in the past, this didn't work too well
(03:25:38 PM) markusschneider: :-(
(03:26:09 PM) markusschneider: and the download page doesn't even mention 3.2-pre3...
(03:26:14 PM) jwilden: Well, I guess that is my responsibility
(03:26:31 PM) jwilden: I will update this today
(03:26:41 PM) jwilden: No action item needed
(03:26:56 PM) ndrs: we could get another person on the team to do the release if jwilden is busy
(03:27:06 PM) ndrs: or on vacation ;-)
(03:27:10 PM) markusschneider: maybe have a wiki page to describe the schedule and process?
(03:27:16 PM) jwilden: That would be nice since my time next month is very rare
(03:27:22 PM) copierrj: automatically releasing?
(03:27:32 PM) markusschneider: hmm
(03:27:49 PM) ndrs: most of the stuff that can happen automatically is already happening automatically
(03:27:59 PM) markusschneider: sounds cool, but there are still a lot of manual tasks involved
(03:28:08 PM) jwilden: Yes
(03:28:14 PM) ndrs: nobody wants a script to edit the Wiki ;-)
(03:28:35 PM) tfr42: What kinds of manual steps are performed to release deegree?
(03:28:45 PM) markusschneider: maybe describe the process (including a checklist) on the wiki first and collect ideas for improving it later
(03:28:53 PM) ndrs: yep
(03:28:59 PM) tfr42: ok
(03:29:05 PM) jwilden: update wiki, announce mail, update roadmap, install & test demo servers, make workspaces available
(03:29:16 PM) jwilden: @ tfr
(03:29:39 PM) jwilden: I can make the checklist
(03:29:45 PM) markusschneider: another action item for the release manager?
(03:29:51 PM) markusschneider: +1
(03:29:53 PM) jwilden: i guess...
(03:29:59 PM) jwilden: +1
(03:29:59 PM) markusschneider: sorry...
(03:30:11 PM) ndrs: +1
(03:30:23 PM) copierrj: +1
(03:30:46 PM) markusschneider: A few more minutes on "deegree 3 documentation progress"?
(03:30:53 PM) jwilden: Yes
(03:30:55 PM) markusschneider: Or shall we stop
(03:30:57 PM) markusschneider: ?
(03:31:05 PM) tfr42: Yes, please.
(03:31:06 PM) jwilden: Lets finish this one too please
(03:31:55 PM) markusschneider: well, after talking to torsten, i understand that we created the impression that we just wanted to talk about technical aspects at the summit...
(03:32:38 PM) markusschneider: to clarify that: i believe that *having* a usable documentation has highest priority...
(03:32:55 PM) jwilden: Agreed.
(03:33:14 PM) markusschneider: but also that the effort for this is highly increased if we cling to an unsuitable technology
(03:33:45 PM) tfr42: I do agree. The current website isn't a eyecatcher.
(03:33:51 PM) markusschneider: did you guys have a look at the mails that i send regarding this subject?
(03:34:06 PM) jwilden: Yes @ markus
(03:34:23 PM) copierrj: Yes @ markus
(03:34:33 PM) copierrj: didn't have the time to look at the tool though
(03:35:09 PM) markusschneider: personally, i am still a big fan of Sphinx (or a comparable documentation generator). but more important is to resolve the blocking here.
(03:35:16 PM) tfr42: But please consider to discuss the process of improving the website and not the tools to use to.
(03:35:45 PM) jwilden: @ tfr: you mean deegree.org?
(03:36:06 PM) markusschneider: at the moment, i am just referring to the documentation...
(03:36:27 PM) markusschneider: i believe this is rather independent of the website
(03:36:37 PM) markusschneider: of course the website is important as well
(03:36:38 PM) tfr42: Any kind of documentation. Wiki, website, pdfs
(03:37:38 PM) markusschneider: @tfr42: you have a suggestion for going ahead with the documentation for deegree webservices?
(03:37:43 PM) markusschneider: or anybody?
(03:37:52 PM) tfr42: Concerning the deegree 3 documentation what problem is the sphinx tool solving?
(03:38:11 PM) markusschneider: versioning.
(03:38:14 PM) jwilden: We would have online & pdf documentation
(03:38:14 PM) markusschneider: strucutre
(03:38:20 PM) markusschneider: structure
(03:38:23 PM) tfr42: I understood that the main obstacle was the structure of the wiki
(03:38:45 PM) markusschneider: please don't underestimate the version mess
(03:39:17 PM) markusschneider: i still don't see how to deal with that...
(03:39:33 PM) ndrs: but still, I think we agreed to think about topics we want to cover first
(03:39:33 PM) tfr42: right, but this could be achivied with wiki power as well
(03:39:36 PM) markusschneider: but agreed. the main obstacle is the current (messy) structure
(03:40:00 PM) markusschneider: @ndrs: documentation topics?
(03:40:06 PM) tfr42: yes, lets define the content of that document and how we can contribute content.
(03:40:20 PM) ndrs: yes, your existing structure would be a good starting point IMHO
(03:40:32 PM) ndrs: even if it is *implemented* in sphinx ;-)
(03:40:33 PM) jwilden: i think so, too
(03:40:49 PM) ndrs: I mean markusschneider's existing draft
(03:40:52 PM) markusschneider: shall i post our suggestion for the contents of the deegree-webservices manual as a ticket?
(03:41:05 PM) markusschneider: which tracker?
(03:41:13 PM) jwilden: PSC
(03:41:17 PM) jwilden: i would say
(03:41:22 PM) markusschneider: or deegree 3?
(03:41:49 PM) jwilden: No, this is clearly something the PSC has to decide
(03:41:57 PM) markusschneider: category "documentation"
(03:42:17 PM) markusschneider: i am not so sure. why is this so different from other deegree 3 tasks.
(03:42:30 PM) markusschneider: we can inform the psc so they can participate if they want.
(03:42:40 PM) markusschneider: and ask for their assistance
(03:42:46 PM) jwilden: because until now this is blocked by the psc if i understand it right
(03:43:09 PM) markusschneider: i believe the psc thinks that we may be blocking the progress here...
(03:43:55 PM) ndrs: I suggest to open a ticket in the deegree3-services tracker, then ask the PSC and TMC to participate
(03:44:00 PM) ndrs: possibly even the mailing list
(03:44:06 PM) jwilden: +1
(03:44:13 PM) markusschneider: +1
(03:44:26 PM) jwilden: Is this regarding structure only?
(03:44:31 PM) copierrj: +1
(03:44:34 PM) markusschneider: in the first step, yes
(03:44:39 PM) jwilden: ok good
(03:44:45 PM) jwilden: action item!
(03:45:24 PM) tfr42: And keep in mind to give an answer who can and who should contribute content to the deegree documentation
(03:45:41 PM) jwilden: @tfr: agreed!
(03:45:45 PM) markusschneider: @tfr42: what do you mean?
(03:46:02 PM) tfr42: by using Sphinx and put the source into SVN you exclude the "users" from adding content to that kind of documentation
(03:47:11 PM) ndrs: tfr42: true, but looking at what happened in the Wiki so far from users, that's been nothing
(03:47:18 PM) tfr42: A developer can contribute content using that tool. But I would expect that ever user should be able to contribute content without struggling with tools
(03:48:09 PM) markusschneider: however, I don't believe that the base documentation is going to be written by anybody else then the developers...
(03:48:17 PM) copierrj: how many users did contribute to the wiki??
(03:48:18 PM) jwilden: True
(03:48:45 PM) ndrs: copierrj: two or three at most, and those were using git and stuff...
(03:49:14 PM) markusschneider: how should anybody out there be able to write the basic documentation?
(03:49:20 PM) markusschneider: how should they know?
(03:49:22 PM) copierrj: our text & documentation guy is able to use svn...
(03:50:10 PM) markusschneider: i see it like this: if we put it in the wiki, then all the work well be done by us anyway
(03:50:11 PM) tfr42: The role "technical writer" needs then access to SVN and tools to edit Sphinx documents
(03:50:19 PM) markusschneider: will
(03:50:36 PM) markusschneider: and?
(03:50:51 PM) copierrj: not a problem imho @ tfr42
(03:51:01 PM) markusschneider: the big problem here is that it's so hard to get access at the moment...
(03:51:17 PM) markusschneider: anyway, let's be more solution oriented
(03:51:41 PM) jwilden: Lets first clear out what content will be documented and the pick a tool
(03:51:41 PM) copierrj: moving to a distributed scm may ease this problem @markusschneider
(03:52:08 PM) markusschneider: right. current manual is at bitbucket
(03:52:13 PM) markusschneider: getting access is easy...
(03:52:32 PM) markusschneider: ok. action item:
(03:52:56 PM) markusschneider: prepare a ticket for the basic structure of the documentation.
(03:53:06 PM) jwilden: +1
(03:53:09 PM) tfr42: agreed
(03:53:14 PM) ndrs: +1
(03:53:15 PM) markusschneider: +1
(03:53:20 PM) copierrj: +1
(03:53:35 PM) markusschneider: great. thanks for all your patience with this issue.
(03:54:18 PM) markusschneider: shall we decide on a proposal regarding Sphinx as well?
(03:54:36 PM) markusschneider: just as our opinion.
(03:54:45 PM) markusschneider: separate issue
(03:55:13 PM) markusschneider: or is this not helping at the moment?
(03:55:19 PM) jwilden: fine with me, but i think it won't change anything or speed up the process
(03:55:34 PM) ndrs: yep, 0
(03:55:36 PM) jwilden: i think it isn't @ markus, sorry
(03:55:42 PM) markusschneider: ok.
(03:56:34 PM) tfr42: focus on the content
(03:56:39 PM) jwilden: markus, you take that action item?
(03:56:43 PM) markusschneider: yep
(03:56:45 PM) jwilden: @tfr: agreed
(03:56:51 PM) jwilden: ok then!
(03:57:08 PM) markusschneider: shall i include a link to the current pdf/html version?
(03:57:16 PM) markusschneider: or rather not?
(03:57:31 PM) jwilden: rather not ;)
(03:57:37 PM) tfr42: Sure. It shows the content ;-)
(03:57:41 PM) jwilden: ok then
(03:58:08 PM) markusschneider: ok. as a footnote then :-)
(03:58:31 PM) markusschneider: i guess this was long enough.
(03:58:36 PM) markusschneider: right?
(03:58:37 PM) ndrs: ok
(03:58:39 PM) copierrj: ok
(03:58:45 PM) markusschneider: see you in two weeks?
(03:58:48 PM) jwilden: Yes
(03:58:50 PM) ndrs: yep
(03:58:52 PM) copierrj: sure
(03:58:54 PM) ndrs: see you then
(03:58:58 PM) jwilden: Thank you all.
(03:59:01 PM) jwilden: Bye!
(03:59:01 PM) markusschneider: bye
(03:59:02 PM) copierrj: bye