MSGID: 2:310/31.3@fidonet eeba2988
REPLY: 2:221/1.58@fidonet eea03fb9
PID: OpenXP/5.0.49 (Win32) (i386)
CHRS: ASCII 1
TZUTC: 0000
Hello August!

*** Sunday 21.03.21 at 10:03, August Abolins wrote to Martin Foster:

 AA>>> Was your test with DeepL?

 MF>> Yes it was.

 AA> What paragraph did you test?

I don't remember now but the major issue was one of formatting.

 AA> Here is section I.0

Yes, very nice :)

[snip
 AA> I added my own wrapping to fit better in this echo.

OK.

 AA> I don't see too many problems above at all.  Minor clean up is
 AA> to be expected.

Yup.

 MF>> [snip]
 AA>>> I just learned about TortoiseSVN, since it support
 AA>>> Windows. It looks like a fine tool for managing doc
 AA>>> changes.

 MF>> Yes, it's an excellent piece of software and it's free :)

 AA> So.. if we were to engage in this project, we would need to
 AA> settle on using the same svn program I suppose.

No, not at all, each user would be free to use whatever svn client they  
chose, even the commandline version of svn would do. In fact, that may  
well be easier for the new svn user because it's only really necessary to  
learn 3 basic commands(checkout, update and commit).

 MF>> https://www.smartsvn.com/

 MF>> I've used the Linux version for many years and have found
 MF>> that "Lite" mode more than meets my needs.

 AA> I'm game to try that one since you're already using it.

I wouldn't really recommend SmartSVN if you're new to version control, I  
feel that TortoiseSVN would be the better choice. The only reason I use  
SmartSVN is because there isn't a Linux version of TortoiseSVN.

However, I don't see the point of trying it out just yet because I haven't  
seen any volunteers step forward and therefore, there's no repository to  
try it out on.

 AA>>> But I suppose we would need a webbased versioning system, not a
 AA>>> local one for participants/editors?

 MF>> The master copy of the document would be held in the remote
 MF>> svn repository and all changes to the document would be
 MF>> done in the users' own local working copy of the document.
 MF>> All changes to the users' working copy of the document
 MF>> would then be commited by each user to the master copy in
 MF>> the remote svn repository. That's simplifying it a bit but
 MF>> you should get the jist of how it works :)

 AA> Oh.. and one person is designated as managing and releasing the
 AA> final "master" copy?

Yes, there would need to be a project coordinator.

Regards,
Martin

--- OpenXP 5.0.49
 * Origin: Bitz-Box - Bradford - UK (2:310/31.3)
SEEN-BY: 1/123 90/1 105/81 120/340 123/131 124/5016 129/305 154/10
SEEN-BY: 203/0 221/0 226/30 227/114 702 229/101 424 426 664 700 1016
SEEN-BY: 229/1017 240/2100 5138 5411 5824 5832 5853 249/206 317 400
SEEN-BY: 280/464 5003 282/1038 288/100 292/854 8125 310/31 317/3 320/219
SEEN-BY: 322/757 342/200 396/45 423/120 712/848 770/1 2432/390 2452/250
SEEN-BY: 2454/119
PATH: 310/31 280/464 240/5832 229/426