>> I don't understand what this has to do with Forrest, >> other than it was inspired by Forrest. >> >> Why are we talking about the design of Piwi on this list? >> Better on the Piwi mail list. > > Because the developers seem to think it is appropriate to the Forrest > project. Just because we don't see why at first glance doesn't mean it isn't > relevant.
We are interested in sharing with Forrest, if we have the same goals. In fact, I allready contributed to Apache and I like the people here. It might happen that people here think that both projects would fit together. I think so :-) >> We have enough trouble getting people to develop Forrest, >> let alone develop someone else's product. > > The problems with Forrest, as I see them, were clearly laid out a very long > time ago. Piwi is addressing the same problems (overly complex, hard to > host, impossible to embed, hard to understand). Correct - PIWI has stolen the best of Forrest and tries to make it as easy as possible. I remember the time when I started to get into Forrest. Or the time I tried to standardize Forrest as documentation tool at my clients company.... hard work! My apologies if I hurt someones feelings here. Forrest is a great tool, and hopefully PIWI can exist as a sub-project or a sisterproject at some time at apache. cheers Chris. >> ---------- >> Note for the mail archives: >> Regarding PHP in Forrest, see the following FAQs: >> >> How to use a different filename extension for output, e.g. *.php? >> http://forrest.apache.org/faq.html#output-filename-extension >> >> How to generate pages ready for serving via PHP? >> http://forrest.apache.org/faq.html#php > > > Neither of those FAQs having anything to do with the motivations of Piwi. > > Ross >
