[Koha] The "one manual" idea

Sat Oct 7 02:58:31 NZDT 2023

Hello,

Thank you all for your replies. They helped inform the discussions at
the 27th September Documentation meeting
(https://wiki.koha-community.org/wiki/Documentation_meeting_27_September_2023)

We made the most of being twice our usual number in attendance and
held a vote on whether to move forward with having one manual for all
Koha versions. Attendees unanimously voted in favour!
We hope to have one manual from an upcoming Koha version - either
23.11 or 24.05. It is logged on Bugzilla as Bug 34955 - One Koha
manual (to rule them all)
https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=34955

Caroline did a great job (as usual!) of providing replies to David
Liddle's comments. As David joined us at the meeting we were able to
cover some of these; and I look forward to discussing the others
further in future meetings.

Here are a few more replies to Elaine and Lisette's comments.

"We run on the latest stable release, and often I find the answers to
my questions in older versions of the manual"
Would you happen to have an example at hand, Elaine? I would like to
understand the situation better.
Yes, we would have each section clearly marked with the version in
release order (possibly reverse release order; that's to be agreed).
For example "From 24.05 version" ; "Up to 23.11 version".
Jonathan Druart provided us with a great example of software
documentation organised in that way: it happens to be the Weblate
manual https://docs.weblate.org/en/weblate-5.0.2/api.html#glossary

"Could we maintain one manual, but link to "named version" of older manuals?"
I feel like this question comes from the fact I wasn't clear enough in
my original message. The answer is no: we won't be maintaining other
versions of the manual. We will only have one with indications of
versions. As Caroline explained, we already aren't maintaining older
manuals.

"I'm intrigued, and possibly interested in helping out."
:-) Anyone can join the Documentation team!
Please do join us at the next meetings (25 October
https://wiki.koha-community.org/wiki/Documentation_meeting_25_October_2023
and 29 November
https://wiki.koha-community.org/wiki/Documentation_meeting_29_November_2023
have been scheduled so far) to take part in discussions.
There is guidance on contributing to the Manual on the Wiki
https://wiki.koha-community.org/wiki/Editing_the_Koha_Manual I am also
planning online "Documentation for beginners" for the next few months
- more information to follow.
Finally, at the moment we also have the automated screenshot project,
which Caroline shared information on
https://lists.katipo.co.nz/pipermail/koha/2023-September/060003.html
And I am always happy to be contacted directly!

Thanks,

Aude [aude_c on Koha IRC]
Documentation Manager for the 23.11 cycle

Aude Charillon
Customer Services Consultant
PTFS Europe
aude.charillon at ptfs-europe.com

Aude Charillon

Customer Services Consultant

PTFS Europe

On Thu, 21 Sept 2023 at 18:29, Caroline Cyr La Rose
<caroline.cyr-la-rose at inlibro.com> wrote:
>
> Thank you David,
>
> That is all excellent food for thought! A lot of questions in which to
> sink our teeth into. (I'm using a lot of food and eating idioms... It's
> lunchtime and I think I might be hungry!)
>
> We will have to discuss all of this in the future documentation
> meetings. Here are some of my answers and thoughts to keep the
> conversation going. Anyone can feel free to contradict me or concur with
> me, please do! :)
>
> Distinction between manual and wiki: as I understand it, the manual is
> for Koha end users (librarians, technicians, library clerks, etc.) and
> the wiki is more for Koha developers, system administrators and IT people.
>
> Informal documentation in the mailing list: as far as I know, there is
> no official process to move something from the mailing list to the
> manual or the wiki. When I see that something comes up repeatedly in
> questions, and I have time, I add the information to the manual. We
> should definitely make it a habit of at least creating a bug in bugzilla
> in the Documentation component to keep a trace that this needs to be
> documented.
>
> Switch languages: that is a good idea. I'm not sure how to implement it,
> and the manual translation is currently a saga all on its own. But you
> can definitely change the URL with the language code. I do it all the
> time between fr_CA and en (note that the URL uses the underscore instead
> of the hyphen between the code and subcode (?), i.e. fr_CA and not fr-CA).
>
> Placeholders for new features: that could be interesting. I wonder if it
> would highlight just how much is missing in the manual, haha! We have
> tried in the past to have developers who submit a patch or institutions
> who sponsor a feature to submit at least some documentation with the
> enhancement. It didn't work, but if it was minimal like "Feature A does
> X, Y, Z [this feature needs more documentation]" or something like that
> it might catch on more (that is what is called "dreaming in colour" in
> French).
>
> Voting/prioritizing documentation sections: I think creating a bug in
> bugzilla or commenting on an existing bug is the best way to do this
> currently.
>
> Versioning: what we currently do is that at one point we create a branch
> for the version of Koha in the git repository and that becomes the
> manual version for that version of Koha. As Aude said, we try to
> backport some contributions to older manuals if the feature exists in
> that version of Koha, but it is not officially part of the process and
> it's pretty much to the discretion of the Documentation manager, who
> does everything (we don't have "version maintainers" like Koha has
> "release maintainers"). Some have more time to contribute and backport
> religiously, some don't have as much time and don't backport (most of
> the time it starts as a good intention of backporting conscientiously
> and as the time goes and other things pile on, it becomes less of a
> priority). This is one of the issues that the "one manual (to rule them
> all)" idea is trying to solve.
>
> It is possible to change versions in the URL, as it is with languages.
> It would be interesting, if we keep various versions, to add this
> possibility like switching languages. I don't know what form this could
> take either.
>
> I'm interested in looking into the version banner thing. There are *old*
> manuals floating in Google (like 3.xx) and I think it'd be interesting
> to clean everything up a bit and place warnings on the oldish ones. I
> might need the help of a developer for this.
>
> As for helping, and this applies to anyone willing to help, there is a
> "Needs documenting" status in bugzilla
> (https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/buglist.cgi?bug_status=Needs%20documenting&list_id=475125&query_format=advanced)
> as well as a "Documentation" component
> (https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/buglist.cgi?bug_status=NEW&bug_status=REOPENED&bug_status=ASSIGNED&component=Documentation&list_id=475126&query_format=advanced).
> Anyone can pick one of those bugs and write documentation. I admit the
> contribution process has a learning curve as we use gitlab and git is
> not something most Koha end users know. The process is described on the
> Koha community wiki
> https://wiki.koha-community.org/wiki/Editing_the_Koha_Manual and we have
> a core team who is willing to teach anyone interested in contributing.
>
> I hope to see you and a lot of new faces in the meeting next week!
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Caroline (off to eat her lunch)
>
>
> On 2023-09-21 11:34, David Liddle wrote:
> > Greetings, Aude—and to the rest of the Koha community following this topic!
> >
> > You have my sympathy. In my role as IT manager, I have to keep the
> > documentation of my environment up to date, and I frequently have to
> > consult the documentation of the systems and services that I manage.
> > It's not easy keeping pace with constant changes. For example, in
> > spite of the vast resources it has available, even Microsoft falls
> > behind on documentation for the versions and editions of the software
> > and services that it offers.
> >
> > I think that the pursuit of a single, authoritative manual would be a
> > good move for Koha. Here are my thoughts on the Koha documentation:
> >
> > – Is there a clear distinction between what belongs in the manual
> > versus what belongs in the wiki?
> >     – There is a lot of informal "documentation" here in the mailing
> > list that would be great to have in either the manual or the wiki.
> > (Not both.)
> > – I think that it would be good to have a means of easily switching
> > between languages for any given section—if a translation isn't
> > complete or is unclear, the reader can switch to a language that may
> > be better. For example, when consulting manuals for Dell products, I
> > can quickly switch between English and German when it makes sense to
> > do so. Microsoft documentation that has been machine translated
> > usually has a little globe icon at the top of the page that allows the
> > reader to switch to the original English text. Other online
> > documentation that I consult requires changing the language tag in the
> > URL, e.g. "de-de" to "en-us".
> > – Even if a new feature doesn't have complete documentation, I think
> > it would be helpful to insert a placeholder for it so that readers at
> > least know that its absence is acknowledged. (You might even advertise
> > the need for additional documentation crew!)
> > – I have occasionally noticed elements that are undocumented. For
> > example, the "SMTP servers" section in "Additional parameters". Might
> > there be a way in which new documentation could be requested or
> > prioritized through one-click bug reporting or a voting system?
> > – With respect to versioning:
> >     – If the manual's backend is capable of versioning, won't it still
> > be possible to consider a point-in-time snapshot to be "version X" of
> > the manual?
> >     – If versions of the manual will be preserved, it would be helpful
> > to be able to switch easily between versions, as with languages.
> >     – If backporting was still carried out under the "one manual"
> > concept, I think that it would be acceptable to limit the extent of
> > the backports to the version considered "oldoldstable" at the time.
> >     – For any version of the manual that is beyond the extent of
> > backporting, I think that it would be acceptable to insert a caution
> > in the header to the effect, "This manual is current to Koha version
> > X. It is no longer maintained. If you see a feature or a process in
> > the manual that does not match what you experience in your Koha
> > installation, please check the same spot in a later version of the
> > manual. (Would the following extension help direct readers?
> > http://sphinx-version-warning.readthedocs.io/)
> >     – Tagging sections of the manual with applicable versions is a good
> > idea, e.g. "Applies to: All Versions", "Applies to: 22.05 and
> > earlier", "Applies to: 22.11 and later", etc.
> >
> > Thank you for soliciting our feedback. If there are elements of
> > documentation and the manual that I could support, I think I could
> > give some time to that.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > David Liddle
> > System Administrator
> > david.liddle at wycliff.de (but not for this list)
> >
> > Wycliff e.V., https://wycliff.de
> > Seminar für Sprache und Kultur, https://spracheundkultur.org
> > Internationales Tagungszentrum Karimu, https://karimu.de
> > _______________________________________________
> >
> > Koha mailing list  http://koha-community.org
> > Koha at lists.katipo.co.nz
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.katipo.co.nz/mailman/listinfo/koha
>
> Caroline Cyr-La-Rose, M.L.I.S. (she/her)
> Librarian | Product Manager
>
> 1-833-INLIBRO (465-4276), ext. 221
> caroline.cyr-la-rose at inlibro.com
> https://www.inLibro.com
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Koha mailing list  http://koha-community.org
> Koha at lists.katipo.co.nz
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.katipo.co.nz/mailman/listinfo/koha