On 23 May 07, at 10:16 AM 23 May 07, Tim O'Brien wrote:
On 5/23/07, Brett Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 23/05/2007, at 2:10 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
> Let's run with that below, now what do we do to organize the actual
> information for each sub-project and what tools can we make to make
> the site making follow that structure below.
I think it's just a matter of configuration at this point. So I'll
get started with SCM. Emmanuel - interested?
I'm also calling on Tim O'Brien and Henri Yandell here since I saw
them at JavaOne and they said they'd help out in some way (even if
just applying patches). I think it was even recorded. Are you guys
in? :)
Yes, I'm going to carve out some time each week to help, and I'm
very aware
that the "Nth time with no real results" has a lot to do with me.
I don't think so. You're hardly responsible, it's us that have let
the wiki and site sprawl. I think it's just the general pattern to
try and hash out the complete plan without actually tackling
something material. Hence my favorite quote:
---
People develop abstractions by generalizing from concrete examples.
Every attempt to determine the correct abstraction on paper without
actually developing a running system is doomed to failure. No one
is that smart. A framework is a resuable design, so you develop it by
looking at the things it is supposed to be a design of. The more
examples
you look at, the more general your framework will be.
-- Ralph Johnson & Don Roberts, Patterns for Evolving Frameworks
---
I would say keep throwing out prototypes and people will comment. I
think people will tell you pretty fast what works and what doesn't
while trying to get them to agree in principle on some document
describing the website is virtually impossible as we've seen in the
past. Four or five people chime in, things get generally confused and
it peters out. I think that's natural. I think the few concrete
attempts by Eric and Brett have been the best things that have worked
and it will move toward what we have as a standard. Working a couple
things or three would be good. I like three as a magic number, if we
get things to gel for the Maven, SCM, and Wagon sites (just throwing
a third) in there then I think we'll have a pattern that works.
I also think it's "put up or shut" time in general. I've said, and
twittered, a number of lukewarm things about Maven, but that has
more to do
with doc frustration than with the project itself. checking out,
checking
JIRA, expect some doc patches.
Tim
Thanks,
Jason
----------------------------------------------------------
Jason van Zyl
Founder and PMC Chair, Apache Maven
jason at sonatype dot com
----------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
