coblei | blender center of information

Blender documentation projects, tutorials, translation, learning & teaching Blender

Moderators: jesterKing, stiv

TEKOBYTE
Posts: 10
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2002 12:48 am

coblei | blender center of information

Postby TEKOBYTE » Fri Oct 18, 2002 12:55 am

Hi,

Just thought I'd tell everyone about my somewhat new project, coblei.
It is an attempt to document every version of blender that will arise from the sources.

To read more, visit the site a www.tekobyte.net

Would anyone like to help? If so, please email me, or post it here.

Thanks!

Sincerely,
Derek Mounce
derek@tekobyte.net

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
www.tekobyte.net

xitnalta
Posts: 68
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2002 11:52 pm
Location: Romanshorn (TG), Switzerland

Postby xitnalta » Fri Oct 18, 2002 2:16 am

Hi Derek!

First of all, where's all the old BLODO / Community Guide stuff? And did I accidentally misunderstand as spam the email that should have informed me about the new site?

Then, I'd like to inform you about my further plans:

1. Waiting for some official NaN documentation (whatever it is - Python stuff, Coding Style, ...). This might take some time, but I won't do anything documentation-wise before then. (And if I don't manage to keep some time free for it, even after.)

2. Have a categorized link list of all available resources that we can use to form a structure for (really) official documentation. This includes an overview over the NaN stuff and all externally available tutorials (in a distinctive section).

3. Gathering some interested people to do two things:

- 3a: provide the infrastructure for easily contributing documentation (huge task, I took some initiative through http://mysite.iptic.com/xitnalta/ )
- 3b: setting up a draft structure for the available documentation using tools provided by 3a, and then filling in the gaps (even bigger than a huge task, an outline of which I proposed here)

As I see it so far, your approach isn't very well organized. The licensing terms contain stuff I've never read in any other license (and thus I don't know whether it will survive) and are quite inconsistent and incompatible with the GNU FDL (the probable license of to-be-released NaN stuff); the goal is "rewrite all information about Blender (every possible version) from scratch", which is just unrealistically unattainable; and you will certainly lack large-scale community support, since you weren't looking at the (usually) good resources that are already available. (This includes choosing a license that only a minority could agree with.)

I don't think this is an environment I can work in. The this-is-unrealistic part also has a very personal touch to me - just look over at http://alindis.sunsite.dk/ . I really don't fancy repeating this.
Felix

matt_e
Posts: 898
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2002 4:32 am
Location: Sydney, Australia
Contact:

Postby matt_e » Fri Oct 18, 2002 4:55 am

Shouldn't we be using blender.org as a central source for documentation? Having too many disparate sites run by different people just complicates things and makes it harder for the user to find what he/she is looking for. Now that it's open source, wouldn't it be better to have a more 'official', centralised, unified approach to it all?

xitnalta
Posts: 68
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2002 11:52 pm
Location: Romanshorn (TG), Switzerland

Postby xitnalta » Sat Oct 19, 2002 1:32 am

broken wrote:Now that it's open source, wouldn't it be better to have a more 'official', centralised, unified approach to it all?


Yes, that's exactly what I agree on: an official project hosted on blender.org and being based on existing work (former NaN docs) is what's inevitably arising anyway. So that's the best place to spend one's energy.

There are some other posts concerning this as well, such as this one.
Felix

xitnalta
Posts: 68
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2002 11:52 pm
Location: Romanshorn (TG), Switzerland

Postby xitnalta » Sat Oct 19, 2002 6:52 pm

Note:
Have a look at Ton's proposals in "NaN documentation database + future"!
Felix

TEKOBYTE
Posts: 10
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2002 12:48 am

Postby TEKOBYTE » Sat Oct 19, 2002 9:59 pm

Hello,

xitnalta:

I did take a look at Ton's post, and my conclusion is he is one of the only people that
actually understands what I want to do.

I have no objection to an official project hosted on blender.org, afterall, it is their site to
do whatever they wish with. But, what about unofficial projects?

Now, all I want to do is to create something that can help the Blender community.
But, if you, xitnalta, are an average example of a member of the Blender Community,
I find that my desire to help, starts to diminsh.

I find nothing wrong with the license. If it does not resemble the GNU FDL, then my goal was accomplished.

The project may seem unorganized right now becasue it is just starting. Something can not
start out as good as it will ever be; it has to get good through lessons learned from failures.


To anyone else wanting to offer their advice, please feel free. Advice and criticism help reduce those
failures, and therefore, reach the goal even faster: to make a great manual.

Sincerely,
Derek Mounce

xitnalta
Posts: 68
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2002 11:52 pm
Location: Romanshorn (TG), Switzerland

Postby xitnalta » Sat Oct 19, 2002 11:47 pm

Hi Derek.

TEKOBYTE wrote:But, if you, xitnalta, are an average example of a
member of the Blender Community, I find that my desire to help, starts
to diminsh.

I still regard myself as quite a new member of the community (joined
elysiun.com in August), so I don't believe that I could serve as an
example of the community, which is, I admit it, generally more easy to
deal with and less stubborn than I am sometimes.

But, to be honest again, you rarely gave me any encouraging feedback
for my attempts to help you as well.

I find nothing wrong with the license. If it does not resemble
the GNU FDL, then my goal was accomplished.

For me, that's quite a biased statement. What I remember from the
discussions we had about this, you only seemed to disagree with some
parts of the FDL. On my part, I can only say that I want to give as
much protected freedom to users of my work as possible. This is best
accomplished through a copyleft license, which you apparently can't
stand.

The project may seem unorganized right now becasue it is just
starting. Something can not start out as good as it will ever be; it
has to get good through lessons learned from failures.

As I see it, your project has these flaws (that can be corrected): it
has a huge goal, a strange license, and a website that sounds as if
you were going to write everything from scratch.

To address the "huge" problem, you have two possibilities: either
reduce the scope of the project, or making it so attractive that you
get a lot of support. And with the support, you also need a clear
organization.

The "license" problem affects the first one: with such a strange
license (which you probably want to refine somewhat anyway) whose
intentions are uncertain (because of the clause that it might change
at any moment), it is difficult to attract the necessary amount of
interested contributors. Especially since many people (I don't say
the majority) support the ideas behind the (copylefted) Free Software
movement. Also, it affects the third issue:

The "from scratch" part is not inherently a problem, but rather a
factor that adds to the other problems (especially the "huge" one).
The simplest remedy would be not to insist on it, but rather look for
existing resources that you could build upon. Now, the license
problem interferes a lot, since the licenses (or in some cases the
makers) of the existing resources will dictate under what conditions
(and license) you can build upon their work. This might also mean
that you had to change your license to comply to these conditions. For
example, if the blender.org documents were going to be GNU FDL (and
it's not very unlikely that they will), you would have to change your
license to the GNU FDL in the case that your work was a derivative of
these documents. I don't think that quoting excerpts would mean
deriving from a document, but that method of work would be surely more
complicated than just enhancing existing material.

The other remedy would again be a very large (and organized) community
of contributors.

To anyone else wanting to offer their advice, please feel
free. Advice and criticism help reduce those failures, and therefore,
reach the goal even faster: to make a great manual.

Sincerely,
Derek Mounce

Maybe I should clarify the first statement of my first post a bit. I
didn't mean to say "oh, you probably informed me, but I give a s* on
that". Reading it again, it looks very close to that, but it really
wasn't meant that way. I was just confused that, after my willingness
to help you, you changed the project fundamentally without informing
me by email or PM or whatever. (And besides that, there really is the
possibility that I could have thought it was spam and just deleted it.
I don't waste my time reading messages that have suspiciously looking
titles.)

What remains to say is: work on your project, I'm absolutely not
against that! You just cannot count on any contributions from my part
anymore.
Felix

TEKOBYTE
Posts: 10
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2002 12:48 am

Postby TEKOBYTE » Tue Oct 22, 2002 6:11 am

Hi,

First, to Xitnalta, I apologize. I was somewhat irritated by what you said, but mainly
about other things. (especially the heat in this town, it is nearly the end of October,
and still 90)
I am also not one of the most indifferent people that has ever been, by any means.
I get offended easily, so, again, I am sorry for acting so immaturely.

which is, I admit it, generally more easy to
deal with and less stubborn than I am sometimes


Hey, you are Swiss after all... :wink: Just kidding.


I have to go now, but I will write back tomorrow.

Sorry again,
Derek Mounceundefined

TEKOBYTE
Posts: 10
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2002 12:48 am

Postby TEKOBYTE » Thu Oct 24, 2002 4:58 am

Hi again,

You said that I never give you any encouragement for your help. I interpreted it as
picky critcism, but it wasn't. Like I said, I take things way to personally and extremely
sometimes.

The GNU FDL, well, I didn't mind parts of it, but some, I just didn't think applied for what I
want. (Mainly the part about selling printed copies)
I have never liked the GNU licenses much. I do like what they try to do, but I just don't
like some of the minor details of them.

Flaws with the project you say:
Huge Goal. I know it is alot of work, but I will go about it slowly. (Maybe it will never even get
far , but I do for sure want to make a general blender manual, like I was talking about on
elysiun a while ago.)
I agree, it needs to look attractive to get people to help. What would you do to make it
more attractive?

Website that sounds as if it is going to be from scratch.
I do want to start from scratch. I don't like the idea of taking someone else's work, adding
to it a but, then calling it my own. I imagine I will end up doing most of the work, but
it would be nice if other people would contribute.

The License.
I do plan to make the license better. That is why I said I the license could change at any
time. I usually make a rough draft so to speak, let it sit, then go back and make changes.
That is the same way I work on my songs.

The other remedy would again be a very large (and organized) community
of contributors.


I hope to establish a community, thats what the forum is for, but it isn't working.
Any ideas to help get a larger community?

Sorry I didn't tell you about the changes, I thought that you were not really interested.

Bye.
Sincerely,
Derek Mounce

xitnalta
Posts: 68
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2002 11:52 pm
Location: Romanshorn (TG), Switzerland

Postby xitnalta » Fri Oct 25, 2002 12:18 am

Hi Derek!

TEKOBYTE wrote:The GNU FDL, well, I didn't mind parts of it, but some, I just didn't think applied for what I
want. (Mainly the part about selling printed copies)

The GNU licenses are made to implement the freedoms that Free Software (and, recently, also free documentation) should grant you to be called that way, and nothing more. So, it is very difficult to like the principles of the FSF, but at the same time be disgusted about even parts of the licenses, because they're essentially the legally bullet-proof version of the basic idea(l)s of Free Software.

That's why, if you want to prohibit third-parties from selling your work, I cannot prevent that (since you're not my slave), but it is against the principle of free distributability, so I'll not help you, because it is not the kind of free I want my work to be. I also might want to have it included in all the major GNU/Linux distributions, which can't be done per se with a license restricting commerce.

Huge Goal. I know it is alot of work, but I will go about it slowly. (Maybe it will never even get
far , but I do for sure want to make a general blender manual, like I was talking about on
elysiun a while ago.)
I agree, it needs to look attractive to get people to help. What would you do to make it
more attractive?

This goes into the realm of community management, which I don't have much experience with. That's probably the main reason why 90% of the free software developers seem to be working on 5% of all the free software projects available - because the initiators of the other 95% either don't need a community or don't know how to attract one. I'm one of them. :oops:

I do want to start from scratch. I don't like the idea of taking someone else's work, adding
to it a but, then calling it my own. I imagine I will end up doing most of the work, but
it would be nice if other people would contribute.

I'll only shortly mention that this, although maybe a laudable mentality, is not in the spirit of the Free Software community. Here, it's about sharing and enhancing knowledge together for the benefit of all.

What I was mainly talking about (and what I will do for the blender.org docs) is first making sure I get permission from every contributor (that might already have written something a long time ago at another website), and only then work with it. Even quoting I wouldn't dare to try outside my school work nowadays :roll: . (I'm currently investigating copyright law for school. I heavily take American law into consideration, since their government tends to dictate it on the rest of the world more than any other country. What might not already be dangerous today might be tomorrow.)

The License.
I do plan to make the license better. That is why I said I the license could change at any
time. I usually make a rough draft so to speak, let it sit, then go back and make changes.
That is the same way I work on my songs.

It's not the best way to do everything, I'm afraid. Especial in legally dangerous times such as these. A license is (generally) not artwork.

The other remedy would again be a very large (and organized) community
of contributors.

I hope to establish a community, thats what the forum is for, but it isn't working.
Any ideas to help get a larger community?

The only idea I have about this is that you have to get havily in touch with people that have similar ideas to yours. As you see, with me, it's a bit difficult, but it's generally the way to pick people up one after another. But I'm only noticing this recently (mind my age ;) ), so I can't tell for sure what's the best way to do it.

Sorry I didn't tell you about the changes, I thought that you were not really interested.

I never said I wasn't interested, and I was working on a not-too-small thing (the DocBook environment), so I hoped that would be (almost) enough to get informed. But never mind, now I know what you're doing again.
Felix


Return to “Documentation & Education”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest