Here are my 2 cents on this subject of editing tools and version control. Microsoft Office/Open Office are commonly known tools and prevalent usage is apparent throughout our community. It is true version control can be weak for a group. If necessary, we can work out a version control process. Both Google document tools and Microsoft Office Live appear to perform well initially, though I have yet to use either of them in a professional collaborative fashion with a working group such as this. These tools are well worth considering. r, Eugene On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 10:00 AM, <occi-wg-request@ogf.org> wrote:
Send occi-wg mailing list submissions to occi-wg@ogf.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/occi-wg or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to occi-wg-request@ogf.org
You can reach the person managing the list at occi-wg-owner@ogf.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of occi-wg digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Editorial tool (Thijs Metsch) 2. Re: Editorial tool (Andre Merzky) 3. Re: Editorial tool (Edmonds, AndrewX) 4. Re: Editorial tool (Alexis Richardson) 5. Re: Editorial tool (Gary Mazz)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1 Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2010 03:37:22 -0400 From: "Thijs Metsch" <tmetsch@platform.com> Subject: [occi-wg] Editorial tool To: <occi-wg@ogf.org> Message-ID: < E2AC825D4FC7764DA86D9C8ECA27A2DE043EB077@catoexm05.noam.corp.platform.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Hi @all,
Since DocBook hasn't turned out to be the best tool for editing our specs I wanted to bring up the discussion on how the following revision should be edited. I guess we have several options - and feel free to add more:
* Word/OpenOffice=20 Pro: Ease of use (Templates available) Contra: Merging and version control
* Latex Pro: Merging, version control easy (Andre could help with templates) Contra: Not so easy to use
* Plain TXT files in Wiki --> then use a tool for formatting when finished... Pro: Easy editable Contra: Not so cool for graphics etc. (formatting)
Feel free to add more and state you preference - It would be cool if in future a lot of people can help edit the specs.
Cheers,
-Thijs
-- Thijs Metsch Senior Software Engineer Grid and Cloud Technology Platform Computing GmbH Europaring 60 D-40878 Ratingen http://www.platform.com
http://www.nohuddleoffense.de/ - http://www.twitter.com/befreax
------------------------------
Message: 2 Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2010 10:41:04 +0200 From: Andre Merzky <andre@merzky.net> Subject: Re: [occi-wg] Editorial tool To: Thijs Metsch <tmetsch@platform.com> Cc: occi-wg@ogf.org Message-ID: <20100701084104.GH68399@jonas> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Quoting [Thijs Metsch] (Jul 01 2010):
Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2010 03:37:22 -0400 From: "Thijs Metsch" <tmetsch@platform.com> To: <occi-wg@ogf.org> Subject: [occi-wg] Editorial tool
Hi @all,
Since DocBook hasn't turned out to be the best tool for editing our specs I wanted to bring up the discussion on how the following revision should be edited. I guess we have several options - and feel free to add more:
* Word/OpenOffice Pro: Ease of use (Templates available) Contra: Merging and version control
* Latex Pro: Merging, version control easy (Andre could help with templates) Contra: Not so easy to use
* Plain TXT files in Wiki --> then use a tool for formatting when finished... Pro: Easy editable Contra: Not so cool for graphics etc. (formatting)
Google docs is another option I guess, although you cannot use the GF accounts that way.
Best, Andre.
Feel free to add more and state you preference - It would be cool if in future a lot of people can help edit the specs.
Cheers,
-Thijs
-- Nothing is ever easy.
------------------------------
Message: 3 Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2010 09:55:31 +0100 From: "Edmonds, AndrewX" <andrewx.edmonds@intel.com> Subject: Re: [occi-wg] Editorial tool To: Andre Merzky <andre@merzky.net>, Thijs Metsch <tmetsch@platform.com> Cc: "occi-wg@ogf.org" <occi-wg@ogf.org> Message-ID: < DAFA889EB3BE6243AEF55CFEE82D68A401B359E59B@irsmsx502.ger.corp.intel.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
- Text might be painful given we need to construct tables, markdown doesn'= t help out here. - I like the idea of google docs; revision history, accessible, no merge i= ssues, collaborative - Latex, great for those who value & know it, PITA for those who've to lea= rn it.
-----Original Message----- From: occi-wg-bounces@ogf.org [mailto:occi-wg-bounces@ogf.org] On Behalf Of= Andre Merzky Sent: Thursday, July 01, 2010 9:41 AM To: Thijs Metsch Cc: occi-wg@ogf.org Subject: Re: [occi-wg] Editorial tool
Quoting [Thijs Metsch] (Jul 01 2010):
Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2010 03:37:22 -0400 From: "Thijs Metsch" <tmetsch@platform.com> To: <occi-wg@ogf.org> Subject: [occi-wg] Editorial tool =20 Hi @all, =20 Since DocBook hasn't turned out to be the best tool for editing our specs I wanted to bring up the discussion on how the following revision should be edited. I guess we have several options - and feel free to add more: =20 * Word/OpenOffice=20 Pro: Ease of use (Templates available) Contra: Merging and version control =20 * Latex Pro: Merging, version control easy (Andre could help with templates) Contra: Not so easy to use =20 * Plain TXT files in Wiki --> then use a tool for formatting when finished... Pro: Easy editable Contra: Not so cool for graphics etc. (formatting)
Google docs is another option I guess, although you cannot use the GF accounts that way.
Best, Andre.
Feel free to add more and state you preference - It would be cool if in future a lot of people can help edit the specs. =20 Cheers, =20 -Thijs
--=20 Nothing is ever easy. _______________________________________________ occi-wg mailing list occi-wg@ogf.org http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/occi-wg ------------------------------------------------------------- Intel Ireland Limited (Branch) Collinstown Industrial Park, Leixlip, County Kildare, Ireland Registered Number: E902934
This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or distribution by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.
------------------------------
Message: 4 Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2010 13:24:34 +0100 From: Alexis Richardson <alexis@rabbitmq.com> Subject: Re: [occi-wg] Editorial tool To: Andre Merzky <andre@merzky.net> Cc: occi-wg@ogf.org Message-ID: <AANLkTimzUr6qdqeErkG8yUP44h_Npfnn_ss9nGDtPvWh@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
+1 for google docs.
On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 9:41 AM, Andre Merzky <andre@merzky.net> wrote:
Quoting [Thijs Metsch] (Jul 01 2010):
Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2010 03:37:22 -0400 From: "Thijs Metsch" <tmetsch@platform.com> To: <occi-wg@ogf.org> Subject: [occi-wg] Editorial tool
Hi @all,
Since DocBook hasn't turned out to be the best tool for editing our specs I wanted to bring up the discussion on how the following revision should be edited. I guess we have several options - and feel free to add more:
* Word/OpenOffice Pro: Ease of use (Templates available) Contra: Merging and version control
* Latex Pro: Merging, version control easy (Andre could help with templates) Contra: Not so easy to use
* Plain TXT files in Wiki --> then use a tool for formatting when finished... Pro: Easy editable Contra: Not so cool for graphics etc. (formatting)
Google docs is another option I guess, although you cannot use the GF accounts that way.
Best, Andre.
Feel free to add more and state you preference - It would be cool if in future a lot of people can help edit the specs.
Cheers,
-Thijs
-- Nothing is ever easy. _______________________________________________ occi-wg mailing list occi-wg@ogf.org http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/occi-wg
------------------------------
Message: 5 Date: Thu, 01 Jul 2010 07:31:37 -0600 From: Gary Mazz <garymazzaferro@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [occi-wg] Editorial tool To: Thijs Metsch <Thijs.Metsch@Sun.COM> Cc: Alexis Richardson <alexis@rabbitmq.com>, occi-wg@ogf.org Message-ID: <4C2C98B9.5030708@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
+1 OO Documents can be saved in raw XML format, although the directory structure is a little complicated. OO Writer does have a convenient merge functions, versioning, comments and review. Diffs are done via "Edit->Compare Document", I think compare works as a command line, although I never needed to try it. The ODF (odt) document format is just compressed xml. Mercurial has diff scripts for odt documents, although hidden metadata is exposed and makes reviewing Mercurial diffs challenging. It runs well on MAC, Vista/x64, OpenSolaris, FreeBSD and most Linux distributions. Supports master documents, integrates with spreadsheets and drawing tools. Outputs XML and there is third party integration into wikis OO Drawbacks, It can be slow in systems with low available memory, another office framework to install, susceptible to JVM quirks.
Google doc require to be connected, difficult in the air, anywhere else you cannot be connected.
Latex: We may as well stay with docbook
Word, if M$ would donate licenses to all editors
Plain text/Wiki: Collaboration and simultaneous editing could be dicey depending on wiki and editor. Most wiki change tracking not intended for collaborative and group review processes.
Personally, I think google docs is not mature enough for a production environment.
cheers, gary
Alexis Richardson wrote:
+1 for google docs.
On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 9:41 AM, Andre Merzky <andre@merzky.net> wrote:
Quoting [Thijs Metsch] (Jul 01 2010):
Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2010 03:37:22 -0400 From: "Thijs Metsch" <tmetsch@platform.com> To: <occi-wg@ogf.org> Subject: [occi-wg] Editorial tool
Hi @all,
Since DocBook hasn't turned out to be the best tool for editing our specs I wanted to bring up the discussion on how the following revision should be edited. I guess we have several options - and feel free to add more:
* Word/OpenOffice Pro: Ease of use (Templates available) Contra: Merging and version control
* Latex Pro: Merging, version control easy (Andre could help with templates) Contra: Not so easy to use
* Plain TXT files in Wiki --> then use a tool for formatting when finished... Pro: Easy editable Contra: Not so cool for graphics etc. (formatting)
Google docs is another option I guess, although you cannot use the GF accounts that way.
Best, Andre.
Feel free to add more and state you preference - It would be cool if in future a lot of people can help edit the specs.
Cheers,
-Thijs
-- Nothing is ever easy. _______________________________________________ occi-wg mailing list occi-wg@ogf.org http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/occi-wg
_______________________________________________ occi-wg mailing list occi-wg@ogf.org http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/occi-wg
------------------------------
_______________________________________________ occi-wg mailing list occi-wg@ogf.org http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/occi-wg
End of occi-wg Digest, Vol 16, Issue 1 **************************************
-- v/r, Eugene Luster