2005/5/24, Ross Gardler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Sebastien Arbogast wrote: > > 2005/5/24, Ross Gardler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > >>Mark Leicester wrote: > >> > >>>Hello Bertrand, > >>> > >>>On 24 May 2005, at 12:20, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>>>Le 24 mai 05, � 11:36, Ross Gardler a �crit : > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>...For example: > >>>>> > >>>>>http://www.planetcocoon.com/node/1209 > >>>>> > >>>>>is > >>>>> > >>>>>http://cocoon.apache.org/2.1/tutorial/tutorial-generator.html > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>Which I find very disappointing: I fail to see the point of copying > >>>>content from our docs on other websites. > >> > >>... > >> > >> > >>>To kick this debate off, let's firstly define the problem. Are we > >>>concerned with the problems that arise from forking documentation? Or, > >>>are we trying to restrict the numbers of sources of information? > >> > >>I think would speak for everyone when I say the concern is in forking > >>the documentation effort. > >> > >> > >>>A technical solution might be to offer RSS feeds from the Apache site. > >>>Cocoon distributions and satellite sites like Planet Cocoon could then > >>>"phone home" for the latest documentation. > >> > >>Which is exactly why I have invited you over to the Forrest dev list so > >>that we can help you build a plugin that will enable you to achieve your > >>goals *without* forking the documentation. Forrest is currently the > >>chosen documentation platform here. One of its great strengths is the > >>ability to bring together documentation from various sources. > >> > >>I'm not at all sure if the Cocoon project will want to go this way, but > >>I propose we create a solution, demonstrate it and then ask for comments > >>and suggestions here. > >> > ... > > > And now you seem to want to redirect all the output of > > PlanetCocoon to Forrest just to be sure it remains the only > > documentation channel. > > You have completely missed my point. I think you ought to read that the > above again. I am offering to assist Mark in what he says he wants to > do, just to be clear I will quote Mark again (from above): > > "A technical solution might be to offer RSS feeds from the Apache site. > Cocoon distributions and satellite sites like Planet Cocoon could then > "phone home" for the latest documentation." > > That is about making official Cocoon docs available to PlanetCocoon in a > form that prevents the need to fork them. > > In a previous mail (in this same thread) I offered to create a plugin > for Forrest that would allow docs on PlanetCocoon to be seemlesly > incorporated into the official Cocoon docs. This offer was made because > the PlanetCocoon home page says "Every effort will be made to ensure > that information generated on Planet Cocoon will end up in the official > documentation." > > I'm only trying to make it possible for PlantCocoon to do what it wants > to do with the minimum of effort. > > > And there are things that Forrest > > doesn't provide and that we intend to provide on Planet Cocoon. And I > > really don't see the problem with that. > > That is not the problem as I percieve it. The problem is the forking of > the *existing* documentation. Forking is *bad* for any project. > > My proposal is to enable PlanetCocoon to continue its work without > forking the existing work *and* achieving its goal of donating valuable > content back to the Cocoon project. > > > What I mean is that (and it's my personal opinion) the way I see it, > > Forrest will be one possible output for our documentation and we will > > do whatever it takes to make it compatible. > > Nobody is objecting to that. I am one person offering to assist with > your integration into the existing Forrest generated docs and the > integration of the existing Forrest docs into your site. I fail to see > what your problem is. > > > But if Forrest remains the only output, > > if we have to limit ourselves technically to fit in the frame of > > Forrest and the "everything Apache" rule of thumb, it's not > > interesting for me. > > Please read my earlier post again in which I say that I am not asking > you to create a "Forrest compatible" format, I am asking for either a > valide XML feed or a (X)HTML document without the navigation and other > decoration. At no point have I, or anyone else, said you can't do what > you are doing. > > There is resistence to forking the documentation effort (meaning taking > the existing documents and community resources and reproducing them > elsewhere under a different banner). This particular thread is about > enabling PlanetCocoon to proceed with its admirable efforts to > regenerate the documentation effort whilst preventing the need to fork > existing work. > > It is called integration. > > Ross
OK I'm sorry Ross. I'm really sorry. You're right I completely missed your point and I apologize for that. It's just that we've encountered so much resistance at the beginning that I've come to be a little aggressive (especially when I wake up in the morning ;-P) and let my young impulsiveness speak on behalf of myself. I hadn't understood "forking" in the way you do and I eventually like the way you see things. I'm sure I'm speaking for both of us (Mark and I) when I say we'll be glad to work with you and *integrate* your offer. People's support, Cocoon PMC attention, Forrest guys interest and things getting done on Planet Cocoon... everything seems to take its shape and it's really exciting :-) -- Sebastien ARBOGAST
