db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andrew McIntyre <mcintyr...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [doc] Where should the DITA source files be checked in?
Date Thu, 03 Mar 2005 20:21:46 GMT
On Thu, 03 Mar 2005 06:30:03 -0800, Daniel John Debrunner
<djd@debrunners.com> wrote:
> I think you need a vote to decide the location, giving various options.
> E.g. under derby/code, derby/docs, derby/site etc.

Yes, well since there is disagreement, I suppose we should have a vote
on it. I'll start one in a separate thread.

here's how I feel about the three options:
- derby/code: I think it's a good idea to keep the doc source with the
code it documents in derby/code (but maybe not if it's really huge, I
haven't looked at the total size of the source)
- derby/docs: Having a new module is a good idea. It keeps the
separation of responsibilities nice and clear. But I think the number
of people who check out the docs will naturally be dramatically less
than if it was included in code, meaning there are less eyes on the
docs and fewer people who might make fixes to the documentation.
- derby/site: Jean had a reason for not keeping them in derby/site. If
I remember correctly it has to do with forrest, in that the
documentation on the website should be brought in as a build product
from elsewhere in order to simplify the website build. she can
elaborate.

> I'm also not sure why these would be added under 10.0, 10.0 is complete
> and already has its documentation.

True, but wouldn't it be nice to have real HTML and PDF documentation
for 10.0 instead of a copy of the website? I believe the current DITA
source is still applicable to 10.0, since changes to document new
features (like INTERSECT) have not been made.

andrew

Mime
View raw message