Please use CVS! (was: Re: [OVC-demo-team] Documentation format)

From: Fred McLain <mclain_at_zipcon_dot_net>
Date: Wed Feb 11 2004 - 22:07:25 CST

Hi all,

Rather then exchange documents via e-mail or posting them on the web I
would like for us to make use of CVS. I believe that all of the
contributers on this list have write access to the version control
system. Of course, we can see the history of changes, all work at the
same time and have good backup. One of the other great advantages is
not bogging down the e-mail while still having access to the current
docs for everyone. That having been said, text documents are the
easiest to merge and are a preferred format for documentation. HTML is
readily editable for documents that really require it (e.g. a document
that requires graphics).

I'm sure most of us have used CVS before, but just in case here are some
common CVS commands for this project:

x="-z3 -d:ext:YourUserName@cvs.sourceforge.net:/cvsroot/evm2003"
cvs $x init # setup CVS in this '.' directory
cvs $x checkout . # get a copy of the source in a "shared" mode
cvs $x update . # sync your files with what's in cvs
cvs $x add MyNewFileOrNewFolder
cvs $x commit # makes changes show up in CVS, always do this when done
cvs $ status .

Windows users can get CVS by installing cygwin (www.cygwin.org). I'm
happy to help out anyone who's having issues with source forge and/or
CVS. Feel free to post to the list or e-mail me privately at:

   mclain () halcyon (da dot) com

It would be very helpful if folks would start scraping some of our
documents off the wiki and web sites and check them in.

Thank you,

        -Fred-

On Wed, 2004-02-11 at 09:32, David Mertz wrote:
> >> I had used APT to create the Architecture and a few other documents.
> > Great. While I do think some shorthand markup formats are nice, I
> > never want
> > to rely on everyone being able to use it that wants to. We can turn
> > every
> > document into PDF, index, etc in OOo. Also, it would be cool to make
> > some PR
> > materials, such as handouts and Impress slides, too.
>
> Well... it's a WHOLE LOT easier to install aptconvert than it is to
> install OpenOffice.org. If you run a recent Linux distribution OOo is
> probably there already... but if you run *BSD, or MacOSX, or MacOS9, or
> (god forbid) Windows, you have some substantial work ahead of you. I
> can kinda imagine a back-and-forth of "well, if I export as X, can you
> read -that-".
>
> The nice thing with APT (or reST, or my own "smart ASCII") is that you
> can email the raw source to someone (or put it on a
> website/ftp/etc)--they'll have no trouble whatsoever reading it, even
> if they've never heard of APT before. They may not know exactly why
> something is indented, or why some dashes occur, but they don't need to
> for comprehension of the underlying document.
>
> Anyway, that was my reasoning, way back when. In practice, I just
> wrote the Architecture myself, at most taking some excerpts from
> people's emails. No one ever looked at the document source, only at
> the HTML export on the website. So for that process, OOo would have
> worked exactly as well.
>
> Yours, David...
>
>
==================================================================
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain
==================================================================
Received on Thu Apr 1 02:40:17 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Apr 01 2004 - 02:40:36 CST