httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rodent of Unusual Size <Ken.C...@Golux.Com>
Subject New CVS module for docco
Date Tue, 12 Oct 1999 12:30:24 GMT
All right, it looks like there's sufficient support for this
to move forward.  Before I make the CVS modules and move
things around, though, the question arises: should they be
named using "http[d]" or "apache"?  The Apache HTTP Server
project is now just one of those under the Apache Software
Foundation umbrella and supported by the ASF infrastructure
(including the CVS repository machine).

It seems as though

a) the API docs should be considered part of the server
   documentation, and
b) the version-specific documentation should be kept
   separate, and
c) all the documentation should be under one module.

This would lead to a structure something like

 httpd-docs/
   1.3/     (current server docs go here)
     API/   (current apache-devsite/apidoc/ goes here)
   2.0/
     API/

The question I'm asking whether the top level should be named
"httpd-docs" or "apache-docs"?  Given that the name Apache now
means more than just the Web server, I'm in favour of the former.
However, that would put it at odds with the existing module
names (apache-1.3, apache-2.0, et cetera).

Opinions?
-- 
#ken    P-)}

Ken Coar                    <http://Web.Golux.Com/coar/>
Apache Software Foundation  <http://www.apache.org/>
"Apache Server for Dummies" <http://ASFD.MeepZor.Com/>

Mime
View raw message