Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!cmcl2!phri!roy
From: roy@phri.UUCP (Roy Smith)
Newsgroups: comp.text
Subject: Using RCS for manuscripts
Message-ID: <2544@phri.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 20-Dec-86 15:55:27 EST
Article-I.D.: phri.2544
Posted: Sat Dec 20 15:55:27 1986
Date-Received: Sun, 21-Dec-86 08:35:45 EST
Reply-To: roy@phri.UUCP (Roy Smith)
Followup-To: comp.text
Distribution: world
Organization: Public Health Research Inst. (NY, NY)
Lines: 27

[sci.research isn't really right for this; followups to comp.text]

	This is sort of a funny question, but I'd like to know what kinds
of experiences people have had using RCS to maintain text documents (as
opposed to source code).  Clearly it's feasable, but I'm thinking more of
the human factors; my target population is a bunch of scientists who know
enough about Unix to deal with emacs, troff, eqn, bib, and tbl, and to do
data analysis using canned applications.  By and large, (although there is
a wide distribution) they are not programmers or real computer types.

	A lot of what we do is manuscripts and grant applications; both
would benefit from RCSification.  Right now, for example, I've got two
people working on a grant application, with separate copies of the files
rapidly growing more and more divergent (one likes Times, the other
Helvetica; that's the only way they keep their printed copies straight).

	Anway, I don't need a sales pitch on RCS/SCCS (I already use RCS
and love it).  What I'm really after are opinions as to whether it is
practical to teach a non-computer type how to use RCS, and have the value
they get out of it exceed the effort they had to put into learning Yet
Another Thing.
-- 
Roy Smith, {allegra,cmcl2,philabs}!phri!roy
System Administrator, Public Health Research Institute
455 First Avenue, New York, NY 10016

"you can't spell deoxyribonucleic without unix!"