[OPEN-ILS-DOCUMENTATION] New Docs file extension? (.asciidoc or .adoc)

[Ruth Frasur]

+1 on this.  It makes sense.  And I agree with Josh on the .adoc.

On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 10:54 AM, Josh Stompro <stomproj at exchange.larl.org>
wrote:

>  +1, this makes sense to me.  I think this is a good step in making the
> github docs workflow easier to use.  I never edit the doc files on a local
> computer and if I did I don’t think notepad++ would care about the
> extension change.  I vote for .adoc as the extension, just because it is
> shorter.
>
>
>
> It helped for me to look at an example,
>
>
> https://github.com/evergreen-library-system/Evergreen/blob/master/docs/admin/librarysettings.adoc
>
> vs
>
>
> https://github.com/evergreen-library-system/Evergreen/blob/master/docs/admin/lsa-address_alert.txt
>
>
>
>
>
> Josh Stompro - LARL IT Director
>
>
>
> *From:* OPEN-ILS-DOCUMENTATION [mailto:
> open-ils-documentation-bounces at list.georgialibraries.org] *On Behalf Of *Remington
> Steed
> *Sent:* Friday, June 19, 2015 8:35 AM
> *To:* Documentation discussion for Evergreen software
> *Subject:* [OPEN-ILS-DOCUMENTATION] New Docs file extension? (.asciidoc
> or .adoc)
>
>
>
> Hi DIG,
>
>
>
> At a DIG meeting on March 5th in IRC, we discussed changing all of our
> doc files from “NAME.txt” to “NAME.asciidoc” (or “NAME.adoc”).  The main
> benefit of this would be that GitHub would recognize these as AsciiDoc
> files and would auto-render them as HTML in the browser.  Hopefully this
> would make it easier for editors to check their work before submitting it.
> Here is a summary of our discussion from that meeting:
>
>
>
> ·         Pro: Would make editing/writing docs on GitHub more friendly
>
> ·         Con: Would make editing files on local computer less friendly
> (if text editor doesn’t know .adoc extension, but most editors can be
> easily configured for this)
>
> ·         Shouldn’t cause any problems with the automatic HTML conversion
>
>
>
> Do you support this change?  Which extension: .asciidoc or .adoc?  Do you
> have any questions or concerns?  If we decide to move forward, the change
> could be made easily, any time, and as a single Git commit.  And we could
> test the nightly conversion process using the master (i.e. dev) branch
> before applying the change to the 2.8 and 2.7 docs.
>
>
>
> Please voice your opinions!
>
>
>
> Remington
>
>
>
> --
>
> Remington Steed
>
> Electronic Resources Specialist
>
> Hekman Library, Calvin College
>
> http://library.calvin.edu/
>
> _______________________________________________
> OPEN-ILS-DOCUMENTATION mailing list
> OPEN-ILS-DOCUMENTATION at list.georgialibraries.org
> http://list.georgialibraries.org/mailman/listinfo/open-ils-documentation
>
>


-- 
Ruth Frasur
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://list.georgialibraries.org/pipermail/open-ils-documentation/attachments/20150619/be7c0478/attachment.html>