Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-xml-general-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 5666 invoked from network); 5 Nov 2004 03:25:19 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 5 Nov 2004 03:25:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 31074 invoked by uid 500); 5 Nov 2004 03:25:08 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-xml-general-archive@xml.apache.org Received: (qmail 30966 invoked by uid 500); 5 Nov 2004 03:25:06 -0000 Mailing-List: contact general-help@xml.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Reply-To: general@xml.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list general@xml.apache.org Received: (qmail 30877 invoked by uid 99); 5 Nov 2004 03:25:05 -0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (hermes.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [65.77.211.93] (HELO indexgeo.net) (65.77.211.93) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.28) with ESMTP; Thu, 04 Nov 2004 19:25:04 -0800 Received: from [192.168.1.100] (static-109.227.240.220.dsl.comindico.com.au [220.240.227.109]) (authenticated bits=0) by www2.kc.aoindustries.com (8.12.9-20030917/8.12.9) with ESMTP id iA53OuAE011696; Thu, 4 Nov 2004 21:24:59 -0600 Subject: Re: Proposal for ASF-wide documentation staging and publishing From: David Crossley To: infrastructure@apache.org Cc: Forrest DEV , general@xml.apache.org In-Reply-To: <2E2745C1-2E90-11D9-B7DA-00039385397E@medata.com> References: <1099520636.22786.75904.camel@ighp> <2E2745C1-2E90-11D9-B7DA-00039385397E@medata.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Organization: Message-Id: <1099625035.22785.81815.camel@ighp> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.2 (1.2.2-5) Date: 05 Nov 2004 14:23:57 +1100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N 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. 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 naivet� 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. Anyway yes, that item [B] represents whatever source control that the project uses. [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 --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xml.apache.org