Hi
From https://jfearn.fedorapeople.org/fdocs/en-US/index.html:
Select a language in the menu to the left, then select a Fedora release and a document title. Fedora documentation has been translated into around forty languages and is available in multi-page HTML, single-page HTML, PDF, and EPUB formats
I can’t find a PDF from Fedora Silverblue User Guide :: Fedora Docs
Maybe my browser blocks something?
Thanks and a happy day
That page is very outdated (looks like from Fedora 20 era). There is no download as PDF option on Fedora Docs page at the moment.
This is the private space of someone called “jfearn”, nothing from us. Although it is less relevant here, it might also be noted that Fedorapeople does not belong to the Fedora Project’s name space and its information does not officially belong to the Fedora Project. So its content has to be taken with care because it is individual’s information without external/Fedora QA/review/consent.
As far as I know, there is no possibility atm to generate pdf’s automatically. Unfortunately, you have to do this yourself.
But if that helps in some way, you can get the adoc source files or the repo in general (I don’t know your exact goal):
Repo:
Folder with the page source files:
A generally easy way is to just print each page into PDF. It looks like that ain’t many pages.
If you just want to have it available offline, you could download the repo (git clone <repo url>) and generate the Silverblue Docs locally with the build.sh & preview.sh → the repo contains an explanation about how to do that (see README in the repo).
Sorry for necro-posting, however, I came along this old topic and would like to correct a few things.
This someone is Jeffrey Fearn, he is or was Senior Software Developer at Red Hat, author of Publican, contributor and core maintainer ofrh-bugzilla.
fedorapeople.org is owned by Red Hat and administred by Fedora Project Infra team afaik.
other references:
Red Hat is not Fedora, and Fedora is not Red Hat.
And this is his private space, not that of the community, and so it is maintained by only one person without any community review. Therefore, we have to be clear that this is not a community page that we are responsible for and therefore that people/readers cannot rely on getting some basic maintenance/QA, nor that pages there get put offline if things get dangerous/risky over long periods or so. E.g., the most recent update of https://jfearn.fedorapeople.org 's main page:
Publican 4.2.0 was released on Wed Aug 27th 2014.
… and the page mentioned earlier in this topic refers to Fedora 20.
What I read at first glance in this topic is that it might be partly based on a confusion that could be linked to this page being very old without updates for long.
This is why we have to differentiate between private spaces, and official Fedora spaces: people might have basic presumptions of QA in pages of Fedora, and even if our Docs are sometimes (or maybe more:) not up to date, when things get dangerous, we put them offline, and we have a community that regularly reviews stuff and reports things, which means if things can become dangerous, it is much more likely that someone will see it, and open a ticket or make aware by other means. The chance for 12 years without update of then-risky content is quite low, and even then, it is likely that occasionally someone would review and make aware if major issues might have risen. At Docs (and other pages/services of our name space), we have/take the responsibility.
Much more important: we cannot rely on any QA/review of Fedorapeople pages at all, even immediately after these things have been published.
This is why these spaces there are not official pages of our community, but of individuals, and it has to be clear and communicated that way, so that people are aware. Unlike our Discourse forums, the issue of individual’s published information at Fedorapeople is not as obvious there. That’s why I was explicit (at least I think that was the reason → 3 years old post).
Keep in mind that Fedorapeople has no sub domain at fedoraproject.org (e.g., like bodhi.fedoraproject.org , koji.fedoraproject.org , fedoraproject.org/wiki/) → there is a reason for that (though it shares that reason with other services related to us). Even if maintained by some of us and used by many of us, its contents are not official Fedora Project information, and has to be treated as such.
That said, I indeed could have been a little clearer and less simplistic in my above post 
It can be indeed misinterpreted (and when taken radically literally, it indeed can be said to be wrong), even if the major point (no official Fedora information) is contained → Fedorapeople is maintained by the Fedora Community, though it does not belong to the official Fedora name space and does not contain official Fedora(-reviewed/approved/consent) information. People cannot expect from this domain what they can expect from the official Fedora name space. Now corrected above
However, I also do not exclude that when I wrote the above, given the formulation, that I somehow mixed up Fedorapeople in my mind with the Fedoraforum or so 
However, I cannot say for sure what I had in mind back then because …
Indeed:
3 years later