Hi, Non-committers who want to contribute documentation via the wiki just have to sign the CLA and fax it. No big deal, it only took me 5 minutes. Writing good documentation is harder IMO :-)
I agree that having two wiki's would be a very bad idea. regards, Maarten On Sat, May 3, 2008 at 1:30 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > "이희승 (Trustin Lee) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>" wrote: > >> It's writable by all committers + asf-clas group for non-committing > >> documentation contributors who've sent CLAs. > > Ok. Just wanted to be sure ... > >> I talked about a dedicated > >> separate CWiki because we can't open the gate for the Cwiki space for > >> auto-exporting. Using the old wiki is also a problem because of the > >> different syntax. > >> > > Yep. > >> > >>> So I think that for users who want to provide documentation, the best > >>> (and only way, I guess) is currently to submit patches through JIRA. > >>> > >> > >> Isn't it inconvenient to use JIRA to attract more people in > >> documentation effort? We already have a documentation component in our > >> JIRA, so we could promote it in our web site anyway. > >> > > This is also an option. The problem with the way we work is that as > > karma is granted on merit, it's hard to establish merit from people who > > have not submitted any material :) So, yes, it's not convenient, but > > this is the way we work. > > > > Anyway, even a pdf proposal attached in a JIRA is ok, as soon as we can > > inject it on our site. The idea is that writing doco does not depend on > > the container. What is important is the content :) > > > > > Hi, > > I think we should multiply JIRA issues for documentation, so it's easier > to attach patch and it's probblly more easy to contribute to a small doco > issues than a big overall tutorial. > > my 2 cents, > > Julien (back in 2 weeks) > > >
