camel-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Johan Edstrom <>
Subject Re: helping out with the Web site
Date Wed, 10 Nov 2010 16:04:38 GMT
I actually really liked the scalate project and writing the docs in IDEA, 
making a patch and tossing it in github.

Offline editing also seems really nice for when you are on planes, in airports or hotels.
Not to mention if you actually fix a bug and submit a patch you could fix documentation in
one feel swoop.

And with the possibility of editing and running Jetty locally - it was really easy.

Just my .02, i'm one of those that like irc for the quick informal style over forums for example,
I also really like svn/git since I have tooling around versioning et al.

And yeah, making patches is "klunky" using diff and things like that.

On Nov 10, 2010, at 8:52 AM, Hadrian Zbarcea wrote:

> On Nov 10, 2010, at 10:28 AM, James Strachan wrote:
>> On 10 November 2010 15:15, Daniel Kulp <> wrote:
>>> On Wednesday 10 November 2010 9:59:11 am James Strachan wrote:
>>>> On 10 November 2010 14:51, Daniel Kulp <> wrote:
>>>>> For most of the people on this list, it ISN'T a big deal.   We deal with
>>>>> svn and mvn every day.   For others, it could be.
>>>> Given 99% of all our documentation and web content is developed by
>>>> committers or folks who are capable of editing text files and using
>>>> git/svn, I'd rather use a system that helps the 99% be more effective.
>>>> Maybe you should just help out this one CXF person & show them how to
>>>> fork & commit to github (its very easy), then you can easily pull
>>>> their commits from there?
>>> Umm..  no.   Pulling branches from github is NOT, at this point, an acceptable
>>> way of getting content into an Apache product.   They would still need to
>>> create a patch and attach it to  JIRA with the "grant" checkbox checked.
>> Whatever happens folks have to raise a JIRA and click the "grant" checkbox.
>> I fail to see why a link to a specific commit (i.e. a link to a number
>> of patches) is any less suitable than a number of patch files being
>> attached in place to the JIRA. Got anything specific to back this up
>> or is it just that we've not done it before?
>> Patch files are a total PITA for both the person contributing and the
>> person applying the patch. (They usually break, get out of sync, have
>> whitespace issues and frequently have the wrong path information in
>> them & often have problems with new/renamed/deleted files).
>> If this discussion really is about being a "community issue" and
>> making it easy for both folks to contribute and for committers to
>> apply those contributions, I'd rather we figure out this issue of
>> using links to git commits as an alternative to patch files on JIRAs -
>> this could make a *massive* difference to both getting contributions
>> and more effectively applying them IMHO. Helping scm-novices
>> contribute to documentation (which they've never really done so far on
>> Camel anyway) seems quite irrelevant in comparison.
> I don't know if this is a scm-novices issues. We had contributions from not committers
in the past.
> Johan (before his commiter days) is one example, Steve Bate is another. I would rather
ask them how likely would it be to contribute to doc if they had to co/edit/submit-patch,
vs edit in-place wiki style.
> I know they are not scm-novices.
> I am open to any alternative that would not raise the barrier to entry for documentation
contributors and that's acceptable to the ASF.
> Hadrian
>> -- 
>> James
>> -------
>> FuseSource
>> Email:
>> Web:
>> Twitter: jstrachan
>> Blog:
>> Open Source Integration

View raw message