[ZO-Coll] [ZOC] 141/ 6 Comment "http://www.zope.org/Members/matt/dco2"

[Collector: NEW Zope.org (the ...]

Issue #141 Update (Comment) "http://www.zope.org/Members/matt/dco2"
 Status Rejected, functionality/bug medium
To followup, visit:
  http://collector.zope.org/ZopeOrg/141

==============================================================
= Comment - Entry #6 by jmeile on Aug 15, 2003 4:01 am

I also disagree. Normally if you write a Readme in STX, you can see the rendered html version in the ZMI under the products folder and you get also an only-text file for the product documentation, like most of the open source software.

Your approach force us to write two versions: STX for the product tarball and a hmtl version to show in zope.org. Why to repeat the information in different formats if it's possible to solve it with the powerful tools of Zope?
________________________________________
= Comment - Entry #5 by chrisw on Aug 11, 2003 5:20 pm

Speaking of access, for some reason I don't have full access to this tracker, and I'm really upset that I can't get this issue out of the 'rejected' state. I do hope someone will at least have the decency to return it to 'pending' so it can be discussed further...
________________________________________
= Comment - Entry #4 by chrisw on Aug 11, 2003 5:19 pm

Ah come on Jens, we can't just loose functionality like this because "the content migration has not been very smooth" :-(

This amounts to adding a checkbox and changing the rendering code very slightly. I'd do it if I had the access but, as a product author, I'm gonna be pretty pissed if I have to totally re-write large chunks of documentation because someone decided not to implement a simple piece of functionality!
________________________________________
= Reject - Entry #3 by jens on Aug 11, 2003 5:15 pm

 Status: Pending => Rejected

Unfortunately the content migration has not been very smooth and content will need to be manually checked by the author and, if necessary, edited or recreated. Our apologies for any inconvenience.

jens


________________________________________
= Comment - Entry #2 by jmeile on Aug 8, 2003 8:20 am

Yes, I also noticed it and it's because they remove the checkbox to select "html" or "structured text" on the Software Packages. I agree with you that it has to be fixed because there are lots of products using stx for the documentation files.
________________________________________
= Request - Entry #1 by chrisw on Aug 8, 2003 7:51 am

The text in the body of the page is STX, but isn't being rendered as such. This probably applies to lots of products and needs to be fixed.
==============================================================