xml-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Clay Leeds <cle...@medata.com>
Subject Re: Proposal for ASF-wide documentation staging and publishing
Date Fri, 05 Nov 2004 15:23:28 GMT
On Nov 4, 2004, at 7:23 PM, David Crossley wrote:
> Clay Leeds wrote:
>> I'd like to respond to David Crossley's message with the hope that it
>> will either move along from its DRAFT classification or get changed so
>> that it can progress...
> Thanks for following up on this. I never know
> about posting to multiple mailing lists. That is
> why i only sent the original to infrastructure@a.o
> and asked people to come here to discuss. Also this
> is where most of the previous discussion took place.

I thought that as well, however I suspect that some COMMITTERs may be 
slow to join infrastructure@a.o (like me) and would therefore miss out 
on arguments... never to be able to see the conversation. I would posit 
that it make more sense to have this 'discussion' on one 
list--perferably with a searchable archive (e.g., 
general@x.a.o--although this should take place on an ASF-wide list), 
and *then* the final RESOLUTION should be given to infrastructure@.

> Never mind, it is good to have broader feedback.
> I will gather the comments from those lists into
> the draft proposal.


> [snip]
>>> [B] Source docs are managed in project SVN
>>> The source files for the project's website are held in an SVN
>>> repository. These might be XML source for some projects, while others
>>> might have simple HTML docs.
>> Forgive my naiveté here, but is this process different for a project
>> like xml-fop, which uses CVS as for version control (i.e., would
>> xml-fop and other 'CVS' projects have a corresponding cvs.apache.org)?
>> Or is this totally separate from a project's version control, and
>> everyone uses svn.apache.org for this stage of the process?
> Of course, perhaps i should have used the generic acronym SCM.
> Actually it was also deliberate, because Infrastructure
> is encouraging projects to migrate to SVN.

Actually, I'm glad you mentioned SVN, because (forgive my naiveté 
again!) I don't use 'SCM' daily... (not like I use SVN or CVS).

> Anyway yes, that item [B] represents whatever source control
> that the project uses.

Glad I asked!

> [snip]
>> With the exception of my one note above (svn.a.o vs. cvs.a.o), the
>> above sounds good^H^H^H^H GREAT to me! I hope others will comment on
>> this (at least to say "Looks good to me!") so this process can move
>> forward, and we can get relieve ourselves of this onerous issue.
>> Thank you David for writing such a clear and concise proposal!
> Thanks. Let us hope that it is a catalyst.
> -- 
> David Crossley

Here's to quick discussion and RESOLUTION of this.

Web Maestro Clay
Clay Leeds - <cleeds@medata.com>
Webmaster/Developer - Medata, Inc. - <http://www.medata.com/>
PGP Public Key: <https://mail.medata.com/pgp/cleeds.asc>

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

View raw message