Just for the record. I like scalate too, it's f*** awesome s*** :). Hadrian
On Nov 10, 2010, at 11:04 AM, Johan Edstrom wrote: > I actually really liked the scalate project and writing the docs in IDEA, > making a patch and tossing it in github. > > Offline editing also seems really nice for when you are on planes, in > airports or hotels. > Not to mention if you actually fix a bug and submit a patch you could fix > documentation in one feel swoop. > > And with the possibility of editing and running Jetty locally - it was really > easy. > > Just my .02, i'm one of those that like irc for the quick informal style over > forums for example, > I also really like svn/git since I have tooling around versioning et al. > > And yeah, making patches is "klunky" using diff and things like that. > > /je > On Nov 10, 2010, at 8:52 AM, Hadrian Zbarcea wrote: > >> >> On Nov 10, 2010, at 10:28 AM, James Strachan wrote: >> >>> On 10 November 2010 15:15, Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org> wrote: >>>> On Wednesday 10 November 2010 9:59:11 am James Strachan wrote: >>>>> On 10 November 2010 14:51, Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> For most of the people on this list, it ISN'T a big deal. We deal with >>>>>> svn and mvn every day. For others, it could be. >>>>> >>>>> Given 99% of all our documentation and web content is developed by >>>>> committers or folks who are capable of editing text files and using >>>>> git/svn, I'd rather use a system that helps the 99% be more effective. >>>>> >>>>> Maybe you should just help out this one CXF person & show them how to >>>>> fork & commit to github (its very easy), then you can easily pull >>>>> their commits from there? >>>> >>>> Umm.. no. Pulling branches from github is NOT, at this point, an >>>> acceptable >>>> way of getting content into an Apache product. They would still need to >>>> create a patch and attach it to JIRA with the "grant" checkbox checked. >>> >>> Whatever happens folks have to raise a JIRA and click the "grant" checkbox. >>> >>> I fail to see why a link to a specific commit (i.e. a link to a number >>> of patches) is any less suitable than a number of patch files being >>> attached in place to the JIRA. Got anything specific to back this up >>> or is it just that we've not done it before? >>> >>> Patch files are a total PITA for both the person contributing and the >>> person applying the patch. (They usually break, get out of sync, have >>> whitespace issues and frequently have the wrong path information in >>> them & often have problems with new/renamed/deleted files). >>> >>> If this discussion really is about being a "community issue" and >>> making it easy for both folks to contribute and for committers to >>> apply those contributions, I'd rather we figure out this issue of >>> using links to git commits as an alternative to patch files on JIRAs - >>> this could make a *massive* difference to both getting contributions >>> and more effectively applying them IMHO. Helping scm-novices >>> contribute to documentation (which they've never really done so far on >>> Camel anyway) seems quite irrelevant in comparison. >> I don't know if this is a scm-novices issues. We had contributions from not >> committers in the past. >> Johan (before his commiter days) is one example, Steve Bate is another. I >> would rather ask them how likely would it be to contribute to doc if they >> had to co/edit/submit-patch, vs edit in-place wiki style. >> I know they are not scm-novices. >> >> I am open to any alternative that would not raise the barrier to entry for >> documentation contributors and that's acceptable to the ASF. >> >> Hadrian >> >>> >>> -- >>> James >>> ------- >>> FuseSource >>> Email: ja...@fusesource.com >>> Web: http://fusesource.com >>> Twitter: jstrachan >>> Blog: http://macstrac.blogspot.com/ >>> >>> Open Source Integration >> >
