[Ardour-Users] best of both worlds

[Tim Mayberry]

On 8/28/07, m.eik michalke <m at openmusiccontest.org> wrote:
> hello tim,
>
> am Montag, 27. August 2007 02:27 schrieb Tim Mayberry:
> > > i was wondering who's in charge of the manual? the contribution draft
> > > could use some information whom to contact, after all ;-)
> >
> > There is no particular person in charge of the manual, as it is
> > located in the source code repository any contribution needs to go via
> > someone with commit access.
>
> i see. wouldn't it help if someone felt personally responsible for it?

It might, there hasn't been much discussion about it that I'm aware of.

> > There is already an issue in the bug tracker about the contribution
> > section(1463) but I'll add contact details to it today.
>
> yes, i'd think that the contribution issue should be of some priority, for
> obvious reasons...

If you are inferring that the standard of the manual is not what it
could or should be then I would agree with you, but keep in mind
that(as far as I'm aware) you are the first person that has mentioned
that the contribution section was empty and it has been so for some
time.

> > >  o http://ardour.org/node/1188
> >
> > That looks like what you would get if you processed the manual without
> > "chunking" it into separate pages using xsl and saving it to a pdf in
> > a browser. Setting up a make target to build the manual so that it was
> > just one big html page is very easy to do if people want that.
>
> well, it seems like a pragmatic hack, but didn't meet my "aesthetic
> requirements", so to say... ;-) that's why i TeXed it, and if pdf export is
> going to be available, it should definitely look better than a browser
> rendered web page, if i'm concerned.

I agree.

> > > as long as creating pdf from docbook is not implemented, i'm offering to
> > > maintain this pdf version, if someone informs me about changes somehow.
> > > and given that anyone finds this as useful as i do...
> >
> > A pdf version should not need to be maintained,
>
> you're absolutely right ;-)
>
> > it should just be generated from the docbook source and any help
> > implementing it would be appreciated but it isn't a priority(at least for
> > me)
>
> in case i didn't make myself clear enough: i consider this pdf as a temporary
> workaround myself. i totally agree that there should be a way to generate it
> automatically from the docbook files. i just did it for myself and thought
> others might eventually find the result useful, too. [it was a wonderful
> opportunity to explore some new LyX features...] from what i found in the
> mailing list archives, a pdf manual is thought of since about 2004, so some
> voluntary "inbetween maintainance" wouldn't hurt, me thinks ;-)

There are many tools and methods for generating pdf's from docbook
source, I've tried a few but had issues and wasn't motivated at the
time to figure them out. If you are interested in looking into it
further then a good resource is: http://www.sagehill.net/docbookxsl/

> > > i have some additional questions and suggestions to make, but first i'd
> > > like to learn who's to address :o) and of course, i'm open to suggestions
> > > as well.
> >
> > I'd say the developer list is the best place for that.
>
> i tried the #ardour channel lately. do i have to join the developers list for
> asking there?

I'm not quite sure what you mean by that. IRC is good for real-time
discussion but if you want to potentially communicate with all the
people "responsible" for the manual then the developer mailing list is
a better medium.

> the most important question i still have is about the manual's
> license, if it has any. ben powers provides a fine tutorial on ardour,
> licensed cc-by-nc-sa 3.0:
>  o http://www.out-of-order.ca/tutorials/ardour/
> so theoretically it would be no problem to include his efforts in parts in the
> manual. but i can't find any license information, which defaults to "all
> rights reserved", so at least the "-sa" term can't be met. and i'm not the
> only one wondering (the mandriva package maintainer asked a few days ago in
> the forum; i can't give you the url since ardour.org is currently offline, as
> it seems).

The licensing issue hasn't really been discussed yet, but thanks for
bringing it up. I think it requires a bit of careful thought as for
instance there are issues with non-commercial licenses and
distribution.

> in the meantime, if it's ok with the developers and since some users think
> it's nice to have, i'd like to know if the pdf file can be made available
> outside this mailing list. someone could announce it in the forum, you could
> upload it to the ftp server or whatever. it's all ok with me.

It is ok with me if it is put up somewhere on ardour.org as long as it
is clear who is responsible for maintaining it, it does look nice
after all even if the content is so-so.

Tim.