geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Jason Warner" <jaw...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Geronimo v2.1 documentation update
Date Fri, 22 Feb 2008 20:20:41 GMT
On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 3:15 PM, Hernan Cunico <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>> 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.

>
> >
> >
> >     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>>>
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