Documentation translators: Changed para in ch_oview

[David T.]

Geert and Frank,

I understand that these aspects of software development are clear and easy for you; suffice to say they are not for me. I do not wish to start any long discussion about the mechanisms for implementing changes to GnuCash’s code and documentation; they have been hashed out many times before. My position has been that I am first and foremost a skilled editor; my abilities in the use of programming tools are epic in their limitations. The use of such tools for the documetation has been and continues to be a significant impediment to my contributing to the improvement of the docs.

Regardless, I have been under the impression (propagated on the user list regularly) that changes should be submitted to BugZilla so that they can be tracked and followed through. I was suggesting that presenting the bug fix solely through git-whatever represents a change in update procedures, and I wanted to know whether *that* is going to be the preferred method in the future. 

David

> On Aug 9, 2016, at 12:48 PM, Geert Janssens <geert.gnucash at kobaltwit.be> wrote:
> 
> On Tuesday 09 August 2016 09:46:00 David T. via gnucash-devel wrote:
> > Frank,
> > 
> > As a git-challenged documentation contributor (I imagine my
> > git-clutziness is well-documented), is there a non-git way you could
> > present your change, so that I might examine it and maybe comment?
>  
> Can you read a diff file or a patch file ? In that case you can look at the following webpage (on github):
> https://github.com/Gnucash/gnucash-docs/commit/e4c8baef5042cd50268b0c5eaa36951e0c37278e <https://github.com/Gnucash/gnucash-docs/commit/e4c8baef5042cd50268b0c5eaa36951e0c37278e>
>  
> Note that due to the way the Italian translation is set up, this commit contains a huge list of changes to the Italian translation file (it.po). Unless you want to take on the Italian translation, you can skip all these changes.
>  
> Otherwise what would you suggest to make it easier on you ?
>  
> Note I don't expect you to understand git and send patches in git compatible format. The github website on the other hand i more than just a collector of git commits. It comes with several useful "reporting" features. One of them is it can visualize the changes in one single commit in a way that's IMO fairly readable without understanding git. I hope that part works for you as well. I would no doubt have been more useful to you if Frank provided you with a link to click on.
>  
> > 
> > To the list:
> > Is the group hoping to move away from bugs on Bugzilla in favor of an
> > all-git process? ISTM that recent comments on the lists hint at that
> > direction. As I note above, this can act as a barrier to some of us
> > technologically challenged individuals. Perhaps it is not such a big
> > deal for code developers, but documentation involves a much different
> > contributor base.
>  
> You're confusing git and github here, but that's ok. Short clarification: git is only a mechanism to store source changes in a way the history remains manageable. It's very powerful for that, which makes it challenging to learn to use efficiently.
> In itself it lacks all kinds of other tools required for development, like a feature/bug tracker, wiki pages,... Github is one website that has set up all these things around git and much more. It's goal is to provide a more convenient way of working with git by providing a graphical interface, and some additional useful features wrt collaboration.
>  
> Having said all that there is no intention I know of to move to a purely github based process - particularly not for the documentation - even though some of it's features are very handy. You are still welcome to provide patches via bugzilla (we're not even using github's issue tracker, hah! ;) ).
>  
> Regards,
>  
> Geert