incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Thomas Dudziak <>
Subject Re: [RT] Super Simple Site Generation Tool
Date Tue, 27 Dec 2005 16:21:08 GMT
On 12/27/05, Leo Simons <> wrote:

> Err, I would suggest you please go and read the general@incubator archives.
> That's basically a "FAQ" at this point. You may also wish to go and look for
> some posts by me over the last few years to the forrest mailing lists, or
> to the avalon mailing lists with the added keyword of "forrest".

Thanks! Since I'm trying to get more into the "Apache" ways, I think
I'll do that (though I think there is a bit more there than just a
"FAQ" given that there are probably several thousand mails in the
archives, and site-dev should be similar though I havn't found its
archive yet).

> I will assert OpenOffice is big and bloated and overkill too and not
> simple at all. I like vi and subethaedit. And HTML.

Well, I was under the (wrong) assumption that you were talking about
the docs of the incubated projects. And for them, OpenOffice might be
a good idea. For a lot of people, everything close to Word is a good
thing, for that matter.
But since your problem is about the Incubator docs itself, OpenOffice
is irrelevant anyways.

> > Anyway, I hope you don't mind me making a case for using this as an
> > opportunity to make Forrest better instead of abandoning it.
> Well, basically I do. I've spent several years (ever since Avalon became
> the first forrest user outside the xml.a.o group) working with forrest,
> helping it to improve and try and help to turn it into something that
> satisfies our simple use case, but its just not a good idea to keep going
> down that path. I've read through about 9 months of discussion on the
> site-dev list where basically the same discussion took place over and over
> again which was very frustrating (or so it seems) for all the participants.
> Nothing is ever going to get done if we keep having the same discussion
> over and over again.
> There is such a thing as "trying too hard" to get "full consensus" on a
> topic that is "too vague". DavidC's site management proposal from so long ago
> and each and every proposal after that has something along the line of
> "Projects can use various documentation tools: Anakia, Forrest, Maven, raw
> html, etc. Each system would have its own ways to report build problems to the
> committer (e.g. xml validation, broken links, content and spelling errors,
> configuration errors)." for a good reason. "There is more than one way to
> do it" and this is going to be Yet Another Way.
> I don't want to spend more time helping to improve Forrest or discussing the
> relative merits of a variety of solutions. I have an itch to scratch and I
> want to build a little piece of software to scratch it, in a way that is
> compatible with all the goals and needs of the ASF, the Infrastructure Team,
> the Incubator, the Gump project, and hopefully a few other projects. But I
> don't want to concern myself with the needs of the Forrest community right
> now as part of this effort, that's making it too hard to get anything done.

Thanks, I understand your itch now :-) Though I'm not quite sure yet
what the implications are.


To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message