forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Diana Shannon <>
Subject Re: [] Dynamic system with WWH (what we have)
Date Thu, 16 May 2002 17:57:23 GMT

On Thursday, May 16, 2002, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:

> I think that this is the best solution, because it takes load from the
> server and can be made to run *now*.
> What do you think?

Lots of interesting ideas, Ken.

If you are referring to docs already in cvs (accessed via ViewCVS), then 
we're probably talking about QA concerns, correct?

We still have to think about the additional demands such a "distributed 
CMS" would place on the commit process. As with previous discussions on 
cocoon-dev, some are advocating that we patch first and deal with 
effects second. If any community member is allowed to patch any document 
in cvs, it would require that some committer subjectively review the 
patch before it can be committed. That may take a lot of time, if 
committer resources are low. For example, let's say you received ten 
QA-type patches from ten different community members for the *same* 
page. I don't even want to think how a cvs would merge diffs from so 
many docs. For documentation, it seems that evaluating diffs are a 
judgment call.

It also gets complicated when QA impacts multiple pages/internal links, 

However, if we could model community QA content (for existing docs) as a 
separate document -- revision -- we could safely and quickly aggregate 
timely feedback into with existing doc content (showing up as comments 
at the end of the article, e.g.), Each QA patch is just a new revision 
doc with hooks to the existing problematic doc/page. Right now, I have a 
revisions/revision structure in my howto.dtd. However, we could pull 
revisions out and allow revision docs to stand on their own. That way, 
revisions could be applied without hesitation, and, from time to time, 
"merged" into existing doc content when a committer/editor has the time.


View raw message