tomcat-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alex Chaffee <g...@stinky.com>
Subject Re: [DOC] Vote on oustanding doc issues?
Date Tue, 10 Jul 2001 02:00:55 GMT
Rob S. wrote:

> Preamble: <grumble> <grumble> =)
> 
> 
>>I don't want to rush it.
>>
> 
> Agreed, but at the same time, I'd like to decide sooner than later.  I'm on
> co-op until August 24th, then I start full-time school again.  4 courses
> doesn't leave a lot of room for TC docs.  Judging by the amount of progress
> we've made recently (pretty much *zero* in over 10 days), I'll be graduated
> by the time we figure out if Tomcat documentation needs a separate
> repository.


Things To Do before we decide on format or CVS:

* Look at the latest TOC and make comments

* Pick a section or subsection and start writing :-)

* Look at http://tomcatbook.sourceforge.net/ and 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/tcbook and see if there's anyone there to 
recruit, or if effort is being duplicated


>>1a) Should Tomcat 3.2 documentation be rolled in together with Tomcat
>>3.3 documentation for a single, up-to-date, source base, whose release
>>cycle will be independent of the release cycle of Tomcat?
>>
> 
> Bundle the 3.2.x docs with 3.2.x and only have the 3.3 docs online ("latest
> Tomcat release").  If you want the 3.2.x docs, get them with the binary or
> whatever.  I certainly don't think we should keep old versions of
> documentation updated.  I mean, why would updated 3.0 or 3.1 docs be useful?
> 
> Too much work, too little people wanting to do it.  I don't think anyone
> would expect even a product company to update their documentation on old
> versions.  The version of docs I, as a user, would expect to see 'shipping'
> with 3.2.2 (if i want to download an older version of the container) is how
> the docs looked at 3.2.2 ship time.


I like this compromise.  I will propose that we get rid of the 3.2 docs 
on the site -- once I'm convinced they're similar enough.  There's still 
that old "3.3 is a rogue release" sentiment floating around, and people 
might not appreciate giving 3.3 implied legitimacy by making it the 
"official" documentation...

> I don't imagine anyone will want to take the task on of converting the
> anarchical doc repository into the format is decided upon, or how we'll
> generate anything useful for people to evaluate during that time.  So
> someone writes in HTML, someone writes in DocBook, etc.  If I want to help
> on different docs I have to figure out the viewing/editing mechanism for
> each one?  Ugh...


Good point.  I'm for Anakia plus a stylebook saying which HTML tags and 
tricks are approved (like, stay away from JavaScript :-)

>>We can work on the TOC independently of resolving those other issues.
>>
> 
> They're not being resolved, different questions are just asked over and over
> again.
> 
> <grumble grumble> =)


No, I think we're making progress.




-- 
Alex Chaffee                       mailto:alex@jguru.com
jGuru - Java News and FAQs         http://www.jguru.com/alex/
Creator of Gamelan                 http://www.gamelan.com/
Founder of Purple Technology       http://www.purpletech.com/
Curator of Stinky Art Collective   http://www.stinky.com/


Mime
View raw message