geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Donald Woods <drw_...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: What's the Wiki story?
Date Mon, 12 Jun 2006 18:49:24 GMT
Agree, but we really have two sets of plugins to host -
1) server CARs that we want to provide as plugins
2) samples and other ASF apps (like Jetspeed2) that should be delivered 
separately from the server releases


-Donald


Matt Hogstrom wrote:
> See my other post.  I hit send too quickly.   I DO think we should host 
> plugins at the ASF.
> 
> 
> 
> Aaron Mulder wrote:
> 
>> I gather from what you're saying you don't think the Geronimo project
>> should host any plugins?  How do others feel?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>    Aaron
>>
>> On 6/12/06, Matt Hogstrom <matt@hogstrom.org> wrote:
>>
>>> As you say since plugins are not owned by the Geronimo project (ASF), 
>>> not released by the Geronimo
>>> project and are not under the oversight of the porject perhaps the 
>>> best thing to do is to put in an
>>> HTML link pointing to www.GeronimoPlugins.com and that way that 
>>> project can manage the releases,
>>> interdependncies, etc.  I think its a nice clean break.
>>>
>>> When Geronimo hosts its own plugins then it would make sense for us 
>>> to document them here.
>>>
>>> I don't think we should host documentation as part of the Geronimo 
>>> Project that is not under ASF
>>> license.
>>>
>>> The plugin framework is part of Geronimo...the content is not and is 
>>> hosted externally.  I think
>>> this is the division.
>>>
>>> Matt
>>>
>>> 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