camel-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Hadrian Zbarcea <>
Subject Re: helping out with the Web site
Date Wed, 10 Nov 2010 16:14:29 GMT
Just for the record. I like scalate too, it's f*** awesome s*** :).

On Nov 10, 2010, at 11:04 AM, Johan Edstrom wrote:

> 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.
> /je
> 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
>>>>>> 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
>>>>> 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