[Geany] Geany Newsletter Vol. 2

[Russell Dickenson]

On 27 May 2011 19:12, Frank Lanitz <frank at frank.uvena.de> wrote:
> Am 27.05.2011 04:01, schrieb Lex Trotman:
>>> Given that:
>>>
>>>  * the various markup formats and their tools can all easily produce
>>> nice-looking html, pdf, and text output
>>>  * people have their own preferences regarding doc markup formats
>>>  * different people at different times may produce a given newsletter
>>>  * no one ever has to go back and edit old newsletters
>>
>> Agree
>>
>>>
>>> I don't think it makes much sense to debate which format to use.
>>> Whomever is producing the current newsletter should decide which
>>> markup format and tools they want to use. [The markup-languages page]
>>> should simply provide requirements for the output (as it already does)
>>> and provide guidance on how to produce a newsletter using the various
>>> tools for those writers who don't have a favorite.
>>>
>>> [The markup-languages page]: http://wiki.geany.org/newsletter/markuplanguages
>>
>> Good idea.
>>
>>>
>>> That page might also provide some default newsletter css source for
>>> those wanting to make their output look like one or another newsletter
>>> (though, variety is the spice of life :) ).
>>
>> But I suspect that it might get annoying if every newsletter looked
>> different, too spicey :-)
>
> I agree. So at latest with with issue 3 I will not change anything on
> markup language as in the end its a useless discussion. All that counts
> is the content.

I also agree. The focus of the newsletter should first be on the content.


>> The css would have to be per markup and tool since the tools don't use
>> the same class and id names for the things we want to style (why
>> should they, there is no standard).
>
> Ia gree.
>
>>> If someone wants to contribute to a given newsletter but is unfamiliar
>>> with the markup format that the producer is using, they should just
>>> send in their content in whatever format they know and the producer
>>> should do the conversion.
>>
>> Yes, so long as the formats are all lightweight markup languages and
>> stick to sections, images and very simple tables then the conversions
>> should be simple, eg asciidoc paragraphs and sections are valid rst
>> but not markdown and links images and tables are all slightly
>> different.  Kinda annoying for the newsletter producer, as I said
>> before wish there were more converters.
>
> Please fill in the wikipage by using the feature list I provided.

Again - I agree. Listing our requirements of a markup method and
associated tools is best done in the wiki. When we have agreed that we
can easily review what's available and choose from them according to
the list.


> There will be a poll in maybe 1 week and we will do the decission. No
> big further discussion here please.

OK. Doodle (poll) here we come. :)


> To be honest I'm really sick of this discussion, as changing to ReST
> wasn't to complicated for me (and shouldn't be for anybody else) but as
> I still prefer LaTeX for doing such work it was a compromise I wanted to
> do.

I can understand your view and frustrations, Frank. You compromised in
moving the markup from LateX to ReST and I appreciate your willingness
in doing this.

> So everybody, please be so kind and think about whether you are able to
> do a compromise too on the first hand and think about whether you ever
> will contribute to the newsletter or just discussing here to discuss
> anything. And if you want to write some content for the newsletter and
> you are sick of language being used for markup, I'm happy to receive a
> odt, doc, pdf or whatever and convert it to the correct format.

Agreed. Let's get on with focusing first on the content. Perhaps it
will take a while for us as a community to get the newsletter's markup
and layout right but that's usually how it is when you start something
new. Too many changes with markup etc right now is distracting us from
our main goal.

> Sorry... a bit pissed,
> Frank

Understood, and I hope I haven't offended by giving my responses. I
sincerely respect you and your views.


-- 
Russell Dickenson