incubator-ctakes-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Chen, Pei" <Pei.C...@childrens.harvard.edu>
Subject RE: Apache Confluence wiki for documentation?
Date Wed, 26 Sep 2012 22:25:40 GMT
No strong objections from me... But I think the contents itself needs updating though as I
think there have been/will be significant changes to the paths/usage since the ASF move, etc.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bleeker, Troy C. [mailto:Bleeker.Troy@mayo.edu]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2012 6:13 PM
> To: ctakes-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: RE: Apache Confluence wiki for documentation?
> 
> I looked at the markdown syntax of the ASF CMS that is where the cTAKES
> Apache site is built. Using this for doc would mean migration from our
> existing Confluence. Internet search revels this is not straight forward.
> Others have issues with broken tables and what was macros. We don't need
> the macros much but the tables are key to the existing doc.
> 
> ASF CMS also has editing/staging/production. While it sounds nice, there is a
> lag between. Maybe not big but if we don't need the function... Confluence
> has version control for every single change that is made. You can revert back
> easily.
> 
> The WYSIWYG editor is super limited with markdown syntax ASF CMS. Tables
> don't even exist.
> 
> Since we have a previous Confluence investment and due to the differences
> noted above, could I suggest/ask that we go ahead with requesting the ASF
> Confluence be set up? (Reopen
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-5185) We should only need an
> export from the old and import to the new. I have done this with Confluence
> before as long as I have admin access. Close version proximity of Confluence
> would be good though. cTAKES doc is currently in a Confluence 4.0 setup.
> This would at least get us started as opposed being on the fence in
> discussion. We can continue the discussion of ship/no ship of doc in parallel.
> 
> Thanks
> Troy
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ctakes-dev-return-422-
> Bleeker.Troy=mayo.edu@incubator.apache.org [mailto:ctakes-dev-return-
> 422-Bleeker.Troy=mayo.edu@incubator.apache.org] On Behalf Of Chen, Pei
> Sent: Monday, September 24, 2012 10:59 AM
> To: ctakes-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: RE: Apache Confluence wiki for documentation?
> 
> Good points... I wonder if we could easily take an export/snapshot of the
> online .mdtext,html,wiki, etc. version during build/release time.  If it seems
> reasonable, we could investigate creating a script or maven goal to export
> from the content /site/ directory as an example (assuming content is there;
> which is probably more important than the delivery mechanism at this
> point)?
> Just throwing out the option...
> 
> My biggest pet peeve in the past with open software is that detailed
> technical documentation never seems to be up-to-date with code that I end
> up just viewing the source anyway.  But a simple/general end user guide,
> quick start examples, FAQ's/known gotchas, are always helpful. My 1/2 cent-
> but I'll leave it up to the experts/volunteers in this realm...
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Jörn Kottmann [mailto:kottmann@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Saturday, September 22, 2012 5:43 PM
> > To: ctakes-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: Apache Confluence wiki for documentation?
> >
> > There are always smaller issues coming up when you release something.
> > If there is a bigger issue the best thing in my experience is to just
> > release again and get it fixed. Doesn't matter if it is something in
> > your software or the documentation. For me its important that i can
> > easily access the documentation for the software version I am running.
> >
> > When I use Open Source software which is not super stable yet and I
> > have an issue I usually try out the trunk version and see how things
> > work there, so in that case I would likely see your documentation update.
> >
> > Jörn
> >
> > On 09/14/2012 04:39 PM, Bleeker, Troy C. wrote:
> > > Would you still say that if you knew that an issue with the product
> > > you just
> > spent 2 hours trying to work-around something could have been avoided
> > if you were looking at the latest documentation? The difference in
> > "ease of access" is minor, no?
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > > Troy
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: ctakes-dev-return-388-
> > Bleeker.Troy=mayo.edu@incubator.apache.org
> > > [mailto:ctakes-dev-return-388-
> > Bleeker.Troy=mayo.edu@incubator.apache.o
> > > rg] On Behalf Of Jörn Kottmann
> > > Sent: Friday, September 14, 2012 9:27 AM
> > > To: ctakes-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > > Subject: Re: Apache Confluence wiki for documentation?
> > >
> > > On 09/14/2012 04:19 PM, Masanz, James J. wrote:
> > >> I also prefer to not distribute the documentation with the release.
> > > I actually prefer to have the documentation included in the
> > > distribution,
> > because then I can always easily access the documentation which
> > matches the version I am working with and do not have to go somewhere
> to find it.
> > >
> > > Jörn


Mime
View raw message