Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-forrest-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 75529 invoked from network); 23 Feb 2005 21:36:53 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 23 Feb 2005 21:36:53 -0000 Received: (qmail 49343 invoked by uid 500); 23 Feb 2005 21:36:51 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-forrest-dev-archive@forrest.apache.org Received: (qmail 49299 invoked by uid 500); 23 Feb 2005 21:36:51 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@forrest.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: List-Post: Reply-To: dev@forrest.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@forrest.apache.org Received: (qmail 49286 invoked by uid 99); 23 Feb 2005 21:36:51 -0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (hermes.apache.org: local policy) Received: from ns3.wkwyw.net (HELO ns3.wkwyw.net) (217.199.181.91) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.28) with SMTP; Wed, 23 Feb 2005 13:36:50 -0800 Received: (qmail 873 invoked from network); 23 Feb 2005 21:36:53 -0000 Received: from 82-69-78-226.dsl.in-addr.zen.co.uk (HELO ?192.168.0.4?) (82.69.78.226) by ns3.wkwyw.net with SMTP; 23 Feb 2005 21:36:53 -0000 Received: from 127.0.0.1 (AVG SMTP 7.0.300 [266.3.0]); Wed, 23 Feb 2005 21:36:46 +0000 Message-ID: <421CF76E.2010702@apache.org> Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2005 21:36:46 +0000 From: Ross Gardler User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Windows/20041206) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: dev@forrest.apache.org Subject: Re: 0.7 Plugin Documentation References: <20050223205404.39947.qmail@web60305.mail.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <20050223205404.39947.qmail@web60305.mail.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N [Please don't reply to a mail and change the subject completely it makes the archives hard to search - start a completely new thread] Jason End wrote: > I was wondering if anyone would object to me rewriting > the Plugin documentation. My understanding is that the > 0.7 documentation isn't finished and hence I find some > of the topics slightly confusing. We welcome *any* contribution that you believe is an improvement to *any* part of Forrest. Please go ahead. > I have some technical doubts that might require a > couple answers from someone, but beyond that I'd have > no problem doing the rewrite. At the moment there are only a few of us who have worked on plugins, so the more questions that are asked about how and why it works the more polished it will become. I'm ready to help where I can. Ross