TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
SVN is one repo and lots of clients. GIT is a repo with lots of client
repos, each with a user. It's decentralised to a point where people can
track their own edits locally without having to push things to an external
server.
SVN is designed to be more central where GIT is based on each user having
their own GIT repo and those repos push changes back up into a central one.
For that reason, GIT gives individuals better local version control.
If you're looking on getting out of SVN, you might want to evaluate Bazaar
<http://bazaar-vcs.org/> for a bit. It's one of the next generation of
version control systems that have this distributed element. It isn't POSIX
dependant like git so *there are native Windows builds* and it has some
powerful open source brands backing it.
But you might not even need these sorts of features yet. Have a look at the
features, advantages and disadvantages of the distributed VCSes
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distributed_revision_control>. If you need
more than SVN offers, consider one. If you don't, you might want to stick
with SVN's (currently) superior desktop integration.
On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 4:27 PM, Chris Morton <salt -dot- morton -at- gmail -dot- com> wrote:
> Thanks, Robert.
>
> Many products and descriptions overlap at the company from what I gather
> (I'm not onboard yet). I am suggesting that they farm out localization to a
> company like WeLocalize that specializes in that (I want nothing to do what
> other than oversight).
>
> So it sounds like Git or Subversion. Isn't Git open source? Subversion
> I've not heard of before.
>
> > Chris
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 4:23 PM, Robert Lauriston <robert -at- lauriston -dot- com>
> wrote:
>
>> Flare allows sophisticated topic and snippet reuse without a CMS.
>>
>> Git or Subversion are source control. They'd let the ten people or
>> whoever share documents. Lighter weight solution than a CMS.
>>
>> Whether a high-end CMS might be required depends I think on how many
>> overlapping products the company has and how many languages the docs are
>> translated into. People who use them generally use DITA.
>>
>> MadCap Contributor is a tool for SME reviews of Flare docs.
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 4:11 PM, Chris Morton <salt -dot- morton -at- gmail -dot- com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I don't know what I don't know. This is why I'm asking the community
>>> here.
>>>
>>> I want something that's current and that has a future. (I do not
>>> consider Doc-To-Help to be the tool I'm seeking, nor do I consider it to
>>> have much a future, although I know they've been around since at least the
>>> early '90s.)
>>>
>>> I've heard of Flare and Git, but not much else about them. I do not know
>>> how I'd use them to repurpose chunks of text. I need an education. I'm also
>>> interested in useful aides that'll give me an instant base knowledge, e.g.,
>>> an O'Reilly book or some such. I'll need to hit the floor running if I get
>>> the nod.
>>>
>>> What is Madcap Contributor? I was thinking of Madcap because of all of
>>> their support, free trials and whatnot.
>>>
>>> The company in question, although consisting of ~130 people, is owned by
>>> a Fortune 500 outfit. My reputation will be on the line.
>>>
>>> > Chris
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 3:58 PM, Robert Lauriston <robert -at- lauriston -dot- com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Which MadCap product would you consider a CMS? Or are you saying,
>>>> forget about a CMS, just use Flare and Subversion / Git?
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 3:52 PM, Chris Morton <salt -dot- morton -at- gmail -dot- com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> > Madcap is what I have in mind.
>>>> >
>>>> > Any reason why I *shouldn't* recommend this tool?
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Read about how Georgia System Operation Corporation improved teamwork, communication, and efficiency using Doc-To-Help | http://bit.ly/1pJ4zPa
