Am I in a time machine???Release of 2.24? Been there , done that.. Try Dev.Release 2.3.5.......WOW...

On 12/18/05, gimp-docs-request@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu < gimp-docs-request@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu> wrote:

Send Gimp-docs mailing list submissions to gimp-docs@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-docs or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to gimp-docs-request@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU

You can reach the person managing the list at gimp-docs-owner@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Gimp-docs digest..."

Today's Topics:

1. REMOVE ME FROM YOUR MAILING LIST NOWREMOVE ME FROM YOUR MAILING LIST NOWREMOVE (DES0LATEDREAMS4U@aol.com) 2. [BULK] (picturebarry@bellsouth.net) 3. Re: Proposal for Metadata (Roman Joost) 4. Re: Proposal for Metadata (Axel Wernicke) 5. Re: Proposal for Metadata (Roman Joost)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1 Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2005 09:38:01 EST
From: DES0LATEDREAMS4U@aol.com
Subject: [Gimp-docs] REMOVE ME FROM YOUR MAILING LIST NOWREMOVE ME FROM YOUR MAILING LIST NOWREMOVE To: gimp-docs@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Skipped content of type multipart/related

------------------------------

Message: 2 Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2005 10:28:56 -0500 From:
Subject: [Gimp-docs] [BULK]
To:
Message-ID:

Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

please remove me from your lists. thank you
picturebarry@bellsouth.net

------------------------------

Message: 3 Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2005 18:59:48 +0100 From: Roman Joost
Subject: Re: [Gimp-docs] Proposal for Metadata To: GIMP Docs
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 03:12:12PM +0100, Axel Wernicke wrote:

to be honest I don't see the benefit of changing the kind of comments we

do by now. The

information is almost the same, but due to that huge surrounding docbook

structure it's very

hard to read in the source. Right now I'd prefer to stick to the way we

are doing it today,

but may be you can convince me.

The advantage is, that people are able to see what happened with the article they're looking at. If the document is out of date, because the last change was a year ago, we could probably encouraged some people to change that. Of course a very vague assumption, but not an impossible one.

It is a very technical approach. The disadvantage about the current comments are, that our readers don't see the comments. Though we have to think about the releases. During releases we should skip to display this metadata.

Greetings,
--
Roman Joost
www: http://www.romanofski.de
email: romanofski@gimp.org
-------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : /lists/gimp-docs/attachments/20051218/5172e0a0/attachment-0001.bin

------------------------------

Message: 4 Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2005 19:48:23 +0100 From: Axel Wernicke
Subject: Re: [Gimp-docs] Proposal for Metadata To: Roman Joost
Cc: GIMP Docs
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

Am 18.12.2005 um 18:59 schrieb Roman Joost:

On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 03:12:12PM +0100, Axel Wernicke wrote:

to be honest I don't see the benefit of changing the kind of comments we do by now. The
information is almost the same, but due to that huge surrounding docbook structure it's very
hard to read in the source. Right now I'd prefer to stick to the way we are doing it today,
but may be you can convince me.

The advantage is, that people are able to see what happened with the article they're looking at. If the document is out of date, because the
last change was a year ago, we could probably encouraged some people to
change that. Of course a very vague assumption, but not an impossible one.

That would of course work only if the revision entries were language dependant. Otherwise If someone translates content from the GIMP stone age the document seems updated recently to *ALL* readers, but was translated to a new language only :(

I think most of the content is independent of time anyway. It simply doesn't matter if a tutorial was written yesterday or two years ago. Where time (GIMP releases) matter of course is everything that is related to the reference part of the manual. May be we should hurry up to get up to date for the 2.2 release (I guess we are not that far away from that) and then freeze and release it as gimp-help 1.0. With this we could split up the changelog (which is btw. pretty large already now) and have a sweet start for bringing the relevant topics up to gimp 2.4 then.

So if we decide to switch to revhistory elements we need to - make sure we can hide it from release html / pdf versions - make it lang dependent (how is this supposed to work with cvs??) - define in which granularity it should be done (today we do it by file, but not sect1 sect2 specific)
- introduce it step by step

Greetings, lexa

It is a very technical approach. The disadvantage about the current comments are, that our readers don't see the comments. Though we have to think about the releases. During releases we should skip to display this metadata.

Greetings,
--
Roman Joost
www: http://www.romanofski.de
email: romanofski@gimp.org