cocoon-docs mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Diana Shannon <>
Subject Re: Cocoon primer, how about starting to write it on the wiki?
Date Thu, 17 Oct 2002 15:45:19 GMT

On Thursday, October 17, 2002, at 05:12  AM, Steven Noels wrote:

> Now that I have commit rights, I did some looking around in CVS - I 
> must say this branch stuff makes things hard to maintain.
It's especially disheartening when the cvs-HEAD docs build is broken (as 
was/is the case as of last week[1]). Docs/content should depend on a 
more reliable generation mechanism. I couldn't agree more that a 
separate cvs branch/module will help matters.

> Possible alternative: have a separate module/directory in HEAD with a 
> subdirectory per version (2.0.x and 2.1-dev) instead of using 
> branches...
Perhaps I'm misunderstanding your suggestion, but this sounds like we'd 
still need to maintain to separate sets of source documents, with a lot 
of duplication between them. I don't see why we can't have a single set 
of source docs, with the ability to generate different versions (2.1, 
2.03, 2.04-dev, etc.)  based on meta data or similar.

> Maybe I'm contradicting my own statements regarding this when Diana 
> mentioned this, dunnow anymore.

It doesn't matter. I'm just glad we view the problem similarly now.

> I'm just throwing this up for grabs. Now that we have some more 
> doco-oriented committers, maybe we have the momentum and the energy to 
> continue the great work of Diana & David - but also the opportunity to 
> rethink things.

Clearly Forrest represents a lot of this rethinking. You know David and 
I have worked through multiple trial runs of using Forrest with Cocoon. 
Problem was, a while back, it's seemingly alpha status (e.g. the 
multiple threads about dropping document 1.1 dtd ) and my frustration 
with the cvs branches made me hesitate in carrying out its incorporation 
within the Coccon cvs.



View raw message