geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Hernan Cunico <hcun...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Geronimo v2.1 documentation update
Date Fri, 22 Feb 2008 20:33:25 GMT
Jason Warner wrote:
> 
> 
> On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 3:15 PM, Hernan Cunico <hcunico@gmail.com 
> <mailto:hcunico@gmail.com>> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>     Jason Warner wrote:
>      >
>      >
>      > On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 2:42 PM, Hernan Cunico <hcunico@gmail.com
>     <mailto:hcunico@gmail.com>
>      > <mailto:hcunico@gmail.com <mailto:hcunico@gmail.com>>> wrote:
>      >
>      >     "Need update" would be something like moved the content from prev
>      >     release but not yet finished. Or worked on some brand new content
>      >     but still need to update it to reflect the latest changes on the
>      >     server ( think of it as if you started before Geronimo was
>     released,
>      >     then you would have a bunch of SNAPSHOTs all over the place).
>      >     If there is anything on the Need update column then there
>     should not
>      >     be a green check mark on the status column. Does this make sense?
>      >     what do others think?
>      >
>      >
>      > Your explanation of "Need update" seems to be about what I thought it
>      > was.  Thanks for the clarification.
>      >
>      >
>      >     As for "...still needs someone who knows what the article is
>     talking
>      >     about to update..." I would hope that the people who jumps
>     into any
>      >     of those subjects can follow it through all the way.
>     Otherwise this
>      >     table won't help us figure out how complete the content
>     really is.
>      >
>      >
>      >  I understand your concern, but there are many topics in the 2.0
>      > documentation that are large and fairly encompassing.  I don't
>     think it
>      > unreasonable for someone to move the document over and fix what
>     they're
>      > able to, but then mark it as Need update if they're not
>     comfortable with
>      > their knowledge on a certain subject.  I think it'll be very
>     difficult
>      > to port all this documentation over if we wait for someone who's
>     able to
>      > verify every thing on a page to take responsibility for it.  I'm not
>      > advocating people just blindly port pages over and mark it as Need
>      > update without attempting to verify what they can.  I just don't want
>      > people to be turned off from helping with documentation just because
>      > they're not a power user.
>      >
> 
>     So, how do we keep track of such topics then. I think looking into
>     previous docs and updating the content is a great start for those
>     that are not experts.
> 
>     By following through I mean just that, if you don't know the
>     entirely topic bring the question forward (dev@, IRC, jira, phone,
>     smoke signals, anything that works) What a best way to learn a new
>     topic than following it through from start to end. I find this very
>     encouraging :D
> 
>     Cheers!
>     Hernan
> 
> 
> Ok, I see what you're saying now.  I was misunderstanding the point you 
> were trying to convey.  I thought you were implying that people new to 
> geronimo should avoid helping with documentation until they've become 
> proficient whereas you were actually saying the exact opposite.  My 
> apologies.
> 

uhhhhhh, no idea my message could have been interpreted that way. Maybe I need to read what
I write more in detail :P

Actually, new users get to see things we sometimes overlook or give as granted.


Cheers!
Hernan

> 
>      >
>      >
>      >     Cheers!
>      >     Hernan
>      >
>      >     Jason Warner wrote:
>      >      > Hernan,
>      >      >
>      >      > What's the "need update" column for on the 2.0 Update status
>      >     page?  Is
>      >      > that to mark a page that is moved over but still needs someone
>      >     who knows
>      >      > what the article is talking about to update it based on 2.1?
>      >      >
>      >      >
>      >      > On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 5:04 PM, Hernan Cunico
>     <hcunico@gmail.com <mailto:hcunico@gmail.com>
>      >     <mailto:hcunico@gmail.com <mailto:hcunico@gmail.com>>
>      >      > <mailto:hcunico@gmail.com <mailto:hcunico@gmail.com>
>     <mailto:hcunico@gmail.com <mailto:hcunico@gmail.com>>>> wrote:
>      >      >
>      >      >     Hi All,
>      >      >     an interesting thing happened twice already this week.
>     Given the
>      >      >     number of doc contributions that started to flow recently
>      >     (THANKS TO
>      >      >     ALL OF YOU CONTRIBUTING) we ended up having, or just
>     about to
>      >     have,
>      >      >     some overlapping.
>      >      >
>      >      >     Talking with some of the folks we thought it would be
>     a good
>      >     idea to
>      >      >     put together some sort of table or a list with the
>     topics and who
>      >      >     was working on them. So, I updated the 2.1 doc home
>     page and
>      >     added a
>      >      >     few more pages to help us figure out who is working on
>     what. This
>      >      >     should also help bring in new contributions.
>      >      >
>      >      >
>      >      >     Here is the page, I already started to put some names
>     there. Pls
>      >      >     chime in and update the info with the content you are
>     working on.
>      >      >
>      >      >    
>     http://cwiki.apache.org/GMOxDOC21/documentation-development.html
>      >      >
>      >      >     What to others think?
>      >      >
>      >      >     Cheers!
>      >      >     Hernan
>      >      >
>      >      >
>      >      >
>      >      >
>      >      > --
>      >      > ~Jason Warner
>      >
>      >
>      >
>      >
>      > --
>      > ~Jason Warner
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> ~Jason Warner

Mime
View raw message