cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Reinhard Poetz <reinh...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [proposal] Cocoon documentation system
Date Tue, 18 Jan 2005 09:59:55 GMT
Steven Noels wrote:
> On 18 Jan 2005, at 09:59, Reinhard Poetz wrote:
> 
>> Andreas Kuckartz wrote:
>>
>>> Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
>>>
>>>> Forrest - pardon my rudeness - sucks as a static site generation 
>>>> system. I can't wait to have it shine as a dynamic system :-)
>>>
>>> What prevents the use of Apache Lenya ?
>>
>>
>> Nothing or as less as the use of
> 
> 
>>  - write my own
> 
> 
> :-)
> 
> I think we're touching the core of the issue here. Rather than looking 
> at lists of features, there's a list of requirements. Without any hard 
> feelings at all, I've lost the ambition or energy to try and motivate 
> people to shape their requirements to better reflect Daisy's features - 

I'm not in the position to change the ASF policy and I don't have the energy to 
lead all the necessary discussions.

> I prefer Daisy users to make a positive choice instead (look at all the 
> features I got!) rather than a negative one (only 85% of my requirements 
> are addressed so I'm doomed). Look at how Jira (and in the future 
> perhaps Confluence) quickly won lots of ASF users - even though Jira is 
> a pig to keep running (Daisy isn't).
> 
> I understand that part of the requirements is to comply with the 
> existing ASF infrastructure. I've had my opportunity to run a 
> non-ASF-infra-resource for two years, and I'm happy that I don't have to 
> check server logs of the Wiki anymore. I do hate the current 
> documentation system and MoinMoin wiki with a passion though, as its 
> split personality is obviously not helping people to produce better 
> documentation. So we definitely need one system, which supports both 
> Wiki-style grassroots authoring, and a proper software documentation 
> CMS. And yes, ASF-compliancy means we should be careful about security 
> if we want to run alongside the code repositories.
> 
> The only thing I am worried about is that your system will add a third 
> option, and that you'll feel the pain in supporting it as I've felt with 
> the JSPWiki at times. 


If I choose Daisy or whatever I could feel the same pain. In all my projects 
I've done so far, Cocoon runs pretty stable *and* in this community there are 
one or two Cocoon specialists available that could help out ;-) And of course 
the plan is to have the webapp running on ASF infrastructure. First on 
brutus.apache.org and I'm sure we get a secure server that is allowed to access 
our SVN repo, if tests on brutus run well.

One thing to add: Of course I don't commit myself to provide a 24/7 support. 
Maybe my attempt will fail, don't know. Maybe somebody else will jump in then, I 
don't know. Maybe it's the start of a new area in Cocoon documentation, who knows.

> I think it will be very hard to combine both 
> editorial and technical/logistical work.

I'll concentrate on the technical/logistical work. Upayavira on the editoral 
work (I hope his plans haven't changed).

> Yeah, I'm trying to sell you Daisy, while I don't commit myself to the 
> documentation overhaul effort. That's because we want to support Daisy's 
> users (which could very well be the documentation overhaulers), rather 
> than loose ourselves again in both doing the work, and supporting the 
> logistics around it. I'm a passive salesman here: I'd be happy and 
> honoured if Cocoon picks Daisy for its features, but Daisy doesn't need 
> such a project to succeed.

I'm sure!

-- 
Reinhard

Mime
View raw message