geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Jason Warner" <jaw...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSSION] Geronimo v2.1 documentation - Content
Date Fri, 22 Feb 2008 18:32:05 GMT
On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 12:05 PM, Donald Woods <dwoods@apache.org> wrote:

> I think J2G should stay listed as a "Tool".  Anything that requires a
> developer tool like Eclipse in-order to use it, should be called a tool.
>

I half agree with what you're saying.  Part of me does want J2G to be in the
tools section, because it does belong there.  I also think it belongs in our
migration section, though, and I don't think it's a good idea to put it in
both.  In my mind, people that are looking for a way to migrate to geronimo
are much more likely to look in a section labeled migration rather than the
tool section.  I'm afraid users will miss it if it's left in the tools
section.  I suppose I could put it back in the tools section and then we
could add a link to it from the migration section. I kind of wish I had
thought of that earlier as it's a pretty simple solution.  I'm going to wait
for a response until doing that, though.


>
> I always view a "Migration" section in a product's docs as how to
> migrate from prior releases, whereas migrating from other vendors
> products is complicated enough to deserve its own set of docs, samples
> and tutorials.
>
I'm not sure what you're saying here.  I think the migration section is
fairly explicit in that it is for migrating an app to Apache Geronimo.  Were
you looking to separate it into a whole new document that isn't included in
the documentation?


>
>
> -Donald
>
>
> Jason Warner wrote:
> > I was looking at transferring the J2G documentation over from 2.0 to 2.1
> > and I noticed that j2g is listed under tools rather than a migration
> > heading.  Are we not going to have a Migration heading?  I'd prefer to
> > put the tool under something more descriptive so that it really jumps
> > out to a user.  Also, there were some migration sample documents that
> > are now left homeless.  I guess I'm wondering if we should bring back
> > the migration heading.  Thoughts anyone?
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 1:49 PM, Hernan Cunico <hcunico@gmail.com
> > <mailto:hcunico@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >
> >     Lin Sun wrote:
> >      > Hi Hernan, I looked at the index you put out there and I think it
> is
> >      > very good!  I cannot wait for these contents to be filled to
> >      > understand a bit more about these exciting 2.1 new features!!
> >      >
> >      > I think it'll be useful to add a FAQ or troubleshooting section.
>   I
> >      > hope this can be the first place for a user to look at whenever
> they
> >      > run into some probs/exceptions.    The content can grow based on
> the
> >      > questions we get on the user list.
> >
> >     At some point we had a Troubleshooting section, maybe I forgot to
> >     bring the title over 2.1 doc. I just added the entry on the User's
> >     guide side.
> >     Ideally the Troubleshooting section should be a subset, an excerpt
> >     of some of the other areas already covered. I personally think of
> >     Troubleshooting section more like a convenience section.
> >
> >     Agree with you that ultimately we want to address every single
> >     question from the user list. Hernan's view of the world!? if a user
> >     have an issue doing a task on Geronimo that means that A) G is not
> >     intuitive enough, B) we don't provide enough documentation on how to
> >     perform such task, C) we do have that info but it is a secret well
> >     kept and only a few know about it ;-) , D) all of the above.
> >
> >     With that said, tackling an issue on the Troubleshooting section is
> >     a great start but we shouldn't stop there ;-)
> >
> >      >
> >      > Also, I think the sample application and tutorial sections are a
> bit
> >      > confusion.  First I look at the sample application and saw we
> only
> >      > have 2 down there but then I realized most of the samples are in
> the
> >      > tutorial section.
> >
> >     The User's guide on the left is somewhat a carry over of topics from
> >     2.0. For 2.1 I brought back the idea of the Developer's guide and
> >     put the Tutorials section there in contrast with Samples section
> >     from the User's guide. If you look at the Tutorials you'll see there
> >     is a different approach, it is more aligned with developing
> >     applications with GEP for instance, hence the location on the
> >     Developer's guide.
> >
> >     Sample applications could end up being renamed to just Samples as it
> >     included some sample configurations as well.
> >
> >     Either way, The doc is still on its early stages and this may change
> >     as we continue to develop the content.
> >
> >     As usual, comments, new ideas and most definitively doc
> >     contributions are always welcome
> >
> >
> >     Cheers!
> >     Hernan
> >
> >      >
> >      > Lin
> >      >
> >      > On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 10:23 AM, Hernan Cunico
> >     <hcunico@gmail.com <mailto:hcunico@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >      >> Hey Kevan, Thanks for updating the doc.
> >      >>
> >      >>  I thought it would be useful for the users to know what
> >     versions are we using for the components/projects that make Geronimo
> >     v2.1
> >      >>  For example, what version of Tomcat, Jetty, Derby, Axis...
> >      >>
> >      >>  It would even help us to keep track of the components and
> >     versions, all in one place.
> >      >>
> >      >>  Maybe this info could later on live on the Geronimo
> >     architecture section. Once we have the info it's easier to move.
> >      >>
> >      >>  Cheers!
> >      >>  Hernan
> >      >>
> >      >>
> >      >>
> >      >>  Kevan Miller wrote:
> >      >>  >
> >      >>  > On Jan 28, 2008, at 11:48 AM, Hernan Cunico wrote:
> >      >>  >
> >      >>  >> Hi All,
> >      >>  >> these are some of the topics I think we should cover for
the
> 2.1
> >      >>  >> documentation. It is not a full list so we need your help
to
> >     make it
> >      >>  >> as complete as possible. Pls chime in with the topics you
> >     would like
> >      >>  >> to see addressed in the documentation.
> >      >>  >>
> >      >>  >> * What's new in 2.1?
> >      >>  >> ** New features
> >      >>  >> ** Component versions
> >      >>  >> ** Configuration changes
> >      >>  >> ** Backwards compatibility
> >      >>  >
> >      >>  > Hernan,
> >      >>  > I've fleshed out the "New Features" a bit in cwiki. Can you
> >     explain what
> >      >>  > you meant by "Component versions"?
> >      >>  >
> >      >>  > --kevan
> >      >>  >
> >      >>
> >      >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > ~Jason Warner
>



-- 
~Jason Warner

Mime
View raw message