I think this thread is over but I just wanted to agree on a point Johan (and probably others) made here.
"Not to mention if you actually fix a bug and submit a patch you could fix documentation in one feel swoop." That is an EXCELLENT point. In the past I've always put off writing any docs for a code change (bad, I know..) partly because confluence is slow and cumbersome and also because once the code fix has been made docs seem lower priority... I think being able to do both in one commit would make doc updates happen more often. I mean, sometimes it may be just that you renamed an endpoint URI property so it may be a really simple change to the docs. On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 12:34 PM, Johan Edstrom <seij...@gmail.com> 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 > > > > -- Cheers, Jon --------------- FuseSource Email: j...@fusesource.com Web: fusesource.com Twitter: jon_anstey Blog: http://janstey.blogspot.com Author of Camel in Action: http://manning.com/ibsen
