Adding a couple of people to the discussion I'd like to
supply an
opinion to the discussion, but who may not be on the list.
On Mon, 2008-02-04 at 22:10 -0500, Eric Christensen wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> A week ago I made some changes to the Encryption and
Privacy Guide [1]
> (EPG) that was going to spread out and categorize all
the information
> that you could possibly put into such a document.
Quaid gave me a
> moment of pause when he said that we need to focus on
Fedora-specific
> information.
>
> I agree and disagree at the same time. I don't think
we need to
> reproduce a bunch of information that is already out
there but I've also
> been taught to not keep telling people to go somewhere
else for information.
>
> Here is what I propose...
> In order to provide a comprehensive guide that covers
privacy and
> encryption that is available to Fedora I think we
should cover in depth
> the Fedora-specific information while providing a
summary and alternate
> paths for getting information for items that are more
Linux-specific.
I don't see a problem with this idea. You understand what
the catch is
and avoid it with the summary approach. We don't want to be
maintaining
miles and miles of content that is going to change from
outside of
Fedora on a regular basis, but we don't need to write it so
that it is
subject to regular change. All of those topics can have a
small section
summary of the technology.
One way we could help the users is to identify the
background they may
want to skip and make it easy for them to learn how to skip
it. Such as
using a regular naming scheme and organization, what-is
followed by
how-to:
GPG
What is GPG
How to use GPG
SSH keys
What are sshkeys
How to create and use sshkeys
File system encryption
What is FS encryption
How to encrypt a file system
...
There could be more common section types, such as "Best
practices",
"Recipes", etc. depending on what the topic is.
Following a consistent
pattern helps the reader navigate to what they want.
With each topic added (FS encrypt + gpg + ssh + ...) there
is a
non-linear increase in work load to maintain future
versions. Once
written it is less work to maintain it, but each section
contains what
and how information that has to be re-checked every six to
twelve
months.
This does make for more modular technical editing, where
someone can
check all the what-is content purely from their own
knowledge without
having to check any implementation (how-to) details.
> There is already non-Fedora-specific information in our
Docs (like a
> guide for using GPG [2}) that could be rolled into the
EPG as a summary.
> ~ This would allow a guide that would be encompassing
while not rewriting
> the book on everything security.
One thing that is different there is that the GPG guide is
specific to
contributors. We would have to look at making it generic,
then
maintaining a separate page in the Get Involved Guide that
told
specifics about using GPG with the Fedora Project as a
contributor.
That seems like a sane approach.
- Karsten
--
Karsten Wade, Developer Community Mgr.
Dev Fu : http://developer.
redhatmagazine.com
Fedora : http://quaid.fedorapeop
le.org
gpg key : AD0E0C41
--
fedora-docs-list mailing list
fedora-docs-list redhat.com
To unsubscribe:
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-docs-list
|