Hi all, Thank you V for putting this together.
>From a high level, I don't like that the proposal is split into a website and a manual. The material should be the same and obviously optionally differently as a site vs a manual. For example, why is the tutorial excluded from the manual? Anyway, this might all be quicker to discuss in a meeting. Maybe the proposal refers to the current state of things? The text refers to 3 major versions being widely used, obviously only 2 are in play ATM. Gary On Tue, Dec 19, 2023, 5:03 AM Volkan Yazıcı <vol...@yazi.ci> wrote: > *TLDR:* Log4j website & manual structure (i.e., sectioning) will be > changed. Please reply for feedback and/or support. > > As a part of the planned Log4j website & manual revamp > <https://lists.apache.org/thread/ntq6db0w4vhqb9bydmn5h683xsgkdkbc>, I ask > for your feedback on the structure Christian, Piotr, and I had worked out > earlier: > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/10Fu7oqDzdM_D6LbexzwX9arh51Tic7AGvkWTQrL6jjQ > PMC > members have editor rights to the document, the rest can only view. > Ideally, first the discussion should take place here rather than directly > updating the document. > > Please take into account that this discussion is only about the structural > organization. It is **not** about tooling (Markdown, AsciiDoc, Antora, > Maven, etc.), which repository/repositories to store the sources, or URLs. >
