perl-docs-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Per Einar Ellefsen <per.ei...@skynet.be>
Subject Re: People behind mod_perl and question about 2.0 docs
Date Thu, 18 Apr 2002 16:19:08 GMT
At 16:20 18.04.2002, Stas Bekman wrote:
>Per Einar Ellefsen wrote:
>>- For the "People behind mod_perl" section, who should be mentioned? Doug 
>>is a given, Stas too, but I guess there are so many more I don't know 
>>about.. From the top of my head, I'd say Eric Cholet, Ask Bjørn Hansen 
>>(?) .... I'm not really sure.
>>We'll need pictures (I found some from the mod_perl BOF, but maybe they 
>>aren't very representative), and descriptions (like how he came to 
>>mod_perl, what he does, etc..). Maybe if those who consider themselves 
>>fit to appear in that section could contribute some info about themselves?
>
>I think this is too dangerous. How are you going to decide who has 
>contributed enough to be included in the venerable list of those "behind 
>mod_perl". Somebody will feel left out and it's a pity.
>
>I suggest we simply say developed by Doug MacEachern with help from 
>numerous other developers too many to list here.

Well, I think it would still be very interesting to have in-depth 
information about the most active contributors, including an image etc... 
Gives a more personal look.

>On the other hand there is this very outdated file: modperl/CREDITS, which 
>if brought up to date could serve as such a document. Here you don't have 
>a problem, you list everybody who has helped, and give some more 
>description to those who has contibuted significantly more.

Yes, I saw this. I'll try and see what I can do with it.
Maybe have like an index page that lists all the authors, with links, and 
then for the pages of the most significant ones, more information with 
picture, several paragraphs, etc.

>>- About the 2.0 docs: should they be edited in-place or is there 
>>somewhere else they should be taken from (i.e. is this the main 
>>repository for them or is it the modperl-2.0 one?)
>
>It's very simple, when you checkout modperl-2.0 modperl-docs/src/docs/2.0 are
>checked out as modperl-2.0/docs, so they are the same docs. Very cool 
>IMHO. One
>source, zero hassle.
>
>We should do the same for 1.0.

Well, as far as I can see, most of the 1.0 documentation is going stale 
anyway, so it shouldn't be that much of an issue. Most changes for 1.0 
happen in the Guide anyway by now.

>How does this work? This is a cvs magick:
>
>% cat CVSROOT/modules
>apachetest-alias   -d Apache-Test httpd-test/perl-framework/Apache-Test
>modperl-docs-alias -d docs modperl-docs/src/docs/2.0/
>modperl-2.0        modperl-2.0 &apachetest-alias &modperl-docs-alias

Oh ok, great then! But this means I'll have to watch myself a little :) 
Anyway, really great.


-- 
Per Einar Ellefsen
per.einar@skynet.be



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-dev-help@perl.apache.org


Mime
View raw message