Hi John, > >> On 1 Jan 2015, at 14:40, Maruan Sahyoun <sahy...@fileaffairs.de> wrote: >> >> >>> This isn’t a good situation at all, we had a usable documentation system in >>> October and now we have nothing usable, with almost no content and no way >>> to easily contribute. >> >> how is the content different from the existing one? There wasn't a lot of >> content and there still isn't. That usable documentation system wasn't used >> a lot. > > Most of the website is missing, all we have is the cookbook. There’s no way > to build, deploy or preview anything. >
it's not meant to replace the whole website. That will still reside in the Apache CMS which will pull the docs sources from GitHub (I explained that in a ticket). pdfbox-docs will hold the sources for the documentation. I brought the cookbook entries so one can see some of the structure. >> >>> We’d agreed that moving to docs to GitHub was an experiment to see if it >>> made contributing easier but it’s had the opposite effect, we’re in a less >>> usable state than ever. It seems like we’d be better off going back to our >>> working SVN documentation and creating a new 2.0 branch from the 1.8 docs >>> and then updating them. We just haven’t realised the benefit from doing >>> things differently. >> >> There were no major contributions to the documentation using SVN. Everybody >> could have done it before but didn't. The non existing content is not >> because of GitHub (or SVN). > > If there’s no advantage to using GitHub then we probably shouldn’t use it. > This was a test to see if there were benefits… but there seem to be none. > >> So my suggestion is to put the content you are planning to contribute into >> pdfbox-docs. Now if you put it into the CMS fine. We can later make it >> available in pdfbox-docs. > > I’d like to do that, but unless I need to be able to build and deploy the > docs to the website somehow. > >> I take some of the blame as I didn't find the time to enhance/restructure >> the website - again that's not GitHubs fault. > > Enhancements are of course welcome, but we need the old functionality > working, at a bare minimum. e.g. where has most of the website gone? > the restructuring is necessary because the pull mechanism needs to be enabled. In addition there needs to be the place for the PDFBox 2 docs together with the old 1.8 docs. That's independent from using SVN or GitHub. I have a little more time now so can look into that (and put the AcroForm stuff to the side for the moment). OTOH if you or someone else wants to do it let me know. BR - Maruan >> Maruan >> >> >>> >>> -- John >>> >>>> On 1 Jan 2015, at 12:52, Maruan Sahyoun <sahy...@fileaffairs.de> wrote: >>>> >>>> the docs shall reside in pdfbox-docs from where they will be pulled onto >>>> the website or looked at directly at github. >>>> >>>> The publishing process to our website is not yet in place as there is no >>>> new content. I'm looking to get the redesign of the website done to >>>> accommodate for the old 1.8 and new 2.0 release. >>>> >>>> Maruan >>>> >>>> Am 01.01.2015 um 19:38 schrieb John Hewson <j...@jahewson.com>: >>>> >>>>> Hi All, >>>>> >>>>> We’re getting closer to 2.0 being ready and I’m thinking about writing >>>>> some docs, but currently the situation seems to be worse than it was >>>>> before the docs stated moving to GitHub - where are our canonical docs >>>>> and how can I contribute to them? >>>>> >>>>> All I see on GitHub is some old 1.8 stuff and an incomplete cookbook for >>>>> forms. Is this content live anywhere? Is there a pay to preview it? >>>>> >>>>> -- John >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >
