Mailing-List: contact general-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: local policy)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
  s=s1024; d=yahoo.com;
  h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type;
  b=pim/ybwW1HlCtvWyNhwLNGe3Rnv/xQbi+dAA+2cSI3JZqFPoEiSL3qDU7L8VCZWH7vXrOKykfXc+qslwYHtWzd1fNLnguHhfQ7lKtT9CYTvshUAE3tbRPKJx1rxRE/RCHnJece+qEl9LuG4gzGFqCosZSOxl57NF59RMqH7E0+M=;
Message-ID: <994525.6899.qm@web54409.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
References: <4dc6c9040912020948j5ccbb31wf61da8ee3c5e9124@mail.gmail.com>
  <4B197A7C.4090809@apache.org>
  <55afdc850912041508w152e51adk588c2b33fd91a91f@mail.gmail.com>
  <4B199F23.5010503@apache.org>
  <55afdc850912041627sdfb6839od0866b86906bc8bd@mail.gmail.com>
  <4B19B285.3050105@apache.org> <4B1A57A8.3030003@xbc.nu>
  <4B1D4D95.5050004@apache.org> <4B1D68B7.8020506@rowe-clan.net>
  <4B1D6CF8.3080908@apache.org>
 <4239a4320912071434r3d19f104qe95e6f40c1d40671@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2009 14:46:21 -0800 (PST)
From: Joe Schaefer <joe_schaefer@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Publishing api docs for Subversion
To: general@incubator.apache.org
In-Reply-To: <4239a4320912071434r3d19f104qe95e6f40c1d40671@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

----- Original Message ----

> From: Paul Querna <paul@querna.org>
> To: general@incubator.apache.org
> Sent: Mon, December 7, 2009 5:34:18 PM
> Subject: Re: Publishing api docs for Subversion
> 
> On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 1:00 PM, Doug Cutting wrote:
> > William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
> >>
> >> I suspect that renaming /docs/trunk/ to /docs/dev/ would be sufficient and
> >> follow this best practice?
> >
> > I don't know how much folks look at the URL, but I think I've heard Roy
> > indicate that all developer-specific stuff should be under a dev/ URL.
> >
> > I think it would be better yet not to link to it from the side bar, which
> > appears on every page, but rather just from the http://httpd.apache.org/dev/
> > page.  If the primary point of posting it is so that developers can refer to
> > it without having to build it themselves, it doesn't need to be posted so
> > prominently, does it?
> 
> But in a way, its still missing a point -- because the other
> documentation URL,s, IE for 2.2.x, are direct subversion exports, with
> no voting on their contents, so its really a branches/2.2.x/docs
> instead of trunk/docs.
> 
> I think the stance being taken understandable, but I believe the
> burden is being placed completely in the wrong direction.  Make things
> easier to do, not harder.
> 
> IANAL, but whats so bad from the ASF liability standpoint that
> requires voting on website content?  if there is ever a problem, we
> pull it.....

Exactly.  That's the key difference between a release and a website, we
can't take the release back.  I honestly can't think of a reason we'd be
successfully sued for actual website content unless we failed to pull down
the offending material once notified of the breech.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org