geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Matt Hogstrom <m...@hogstrom.org>
Subject Re: What's the Wiki story?
Date Mon, 12 Jun 2006 17:31:16 GMT
Sorry, I hit send too quickly.

What I was going to add was that I expect there will be a number of plugin providers for Geronimo.

The idea is excellent and hats off to you for bringing it forward to Geronimo.  Here is a
partial 
list of possible providers.

http://geronimo.apache.org/plugins
http://geronimoplugins.com (commercial)
http://www.ibm.com/wasce/plugins (commercial)
http://www.friendsofgeronimoplugins.org (open source)
http://www.dontforgetmetoogeronimopluginsproviders.com (some odd group of people)

My point is that as the list of providers grows who do we gather versioning information from?
 Who 
is first in the list, etc.

I think we should organize the content for the first entry in the list and host the appropriat

plugins there.  Samples and Directory are good choices since they came from Geronimo and are
ASF 
projects.  For other plugin providers we offer a link to their site in alphabetical order
(ascending).

Does this make sense?

Aaron Mulder wrote:
> On 6/12/06, Hernan Cunico <hcunico@gmail.com> wrote:
>> As far as I can see, plugins are part of Geronimo and they should be 
>> in the 1.1 documentation space.
> 
> I diasgree.  Plugins will be versioned separately from Geronimo, and
> will not all be developed by the Geronimo team.  What will we do with
> the Geronimo 1.1 documentation if Plugin Foo is at version 1.0 when
> Geronimo 1.1 ships, but Plugin Foo goes through version 1.1, 1.2, and
> 1.3 before Geronimo 1.2 ships?  Will we constantly be updating the
> Geronimo 1.1 documentation?  I don't think that makes sense.
> 
> I think there should be a Plugins space with the Plugin Foo
> documentation.  In the Geronimo 1.1 documentation we can include a
> list of known available plugins with references to their individual
> documentation pages, or we can actually repeat some common usage of
> popular plugins, but I don't think we should try to capture the
> current state of all plugins (and either have it get terribly outdated
> or need frequent changes to the "finished" parts of the 1.1
> documentation).
> 
>> The plan is, as I proposed several times in earlier emails, to move 
>> all the content from MoinMoin to
>> Confluence. Most of the content in the MoinMoin is outdated or 
>> duplicated, the docs that are still
>> valid should be moved to a section within the new structure in 
>> confluence. Those topics that don't
>> fit either the User's or Developer's guide should go into the Geronimo 
>> SandBox space which is
>> version independent. This space should hold historical data like the 
>> logo contest for example.
> 
> OK.  Who's going to do that migration?  Also, I have to say, I don't
> think that putting documentation in a different Wiki is going to
> automatically keep it up to date.  It's a nice opportunity to clean
> up, but I imagine we'll need a regular cleaning process if we don't
> want our Wiki to get out of date.
> 
> Thanks,
>    Aaron
> 
>> Aaron Mulder wrote:
>> > I'd like to add some documentation for specific plugins to a Wiki.  I
>> > don't know if the plan is to migrate pretty much everything to
>> > Confluence or only keep our main documentation there and use MoinMoin
>> > for the rest or what.
>> >
>> > Still, if we're documenting available plugins, that's probably more or
>> > less project documentation, and should go in Confluence anyway.  Could
>> > someone with admin access create an Apache Geronimo Plugins space?
>> > (The plugins will be on a separate release track from Geronimo so I
>> > don't think the plugin docs should necessarily go in the 1.1 docs.)
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> >    Aaron
>> >
>>
> 
> 
> 

Mime
View raw message