Linden H van der (MI) wrote:
This will mean that people will be able to do "forrest run"
and edit the
content in SVn immediately. As the Daisy plugin matures the
same will be
true for content in a Daisy repository. Similarly, if PlanetCocoon
succeeds we can integrate their content and editing in the same way.
AHHH. Why should docs be allowed to be entered into SVN immediately
while code requires a committership that should be "earned"?
In the short term, whilst the docs are in SVN this editor will allow
committers to edit the docs quickly and easily. It is not the "end"
solution, there are lots of possible workflows:
- move the docs into a separate SVN module we can provide separate
committership to that repository
- if the editor fails to do the SVN upload (i.e. user does not have
commit access) then a diff is sent to bugzilla
- Cocoon Documentation System
http://wiki.apache.org/cocoon/CocoonDocumentationSystem?highlight=%28document%29
- DoCo http://wiki.apache.org/cocoon/Doco?highlight=%28doco%29
- scenarios for Daisy:
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=xml-cocoon-dev&m=111597785506944&w=2
- Forrest as an integrator
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=xml-cocoon-dev&m=111591833106339&w=2
Many more ideas will emerge as the discussion rages
I think we need a set of "rules" for documentation as much as there is a
set of "rules" for contributing code.
For one potential solution for other external CMS systems see
Adding docs should definitely be easier than it is now, but please
through a separate process, otherwise you end up with a similar
set/quality of docs that exists now, but in a different configuration.
You are correct, but as you can see this has been discussed to death.
There are a great many consistent themes in the above links, lets pull
the consistent stuff out and implement it whilst we finish working on
the finer details of the later stages.
Release early, release often.
Ross
