On Mon, Nov 07, 2005 at 08:33:48PM +, Ross Gardler wrote:
> Paul Bolger wrote:
> > So, what is the function of site.xml, if it's not to do the above?
>
> Please be careful with your snipping of mails. The above sentence is
> meaningless in the context of the archives. I've made it worse by m
Paul Bolger wrote:
So, what is the function of site.xml, if it's not to do the above?
Please be careful with your snipping of mails. The above sentence is
meaningless in the context of the archives. I've made it worse by moving
this to a new thread (something we should have done as soon as we
So, what is the function of site.xml, if it's not to do the above? I'm
a bit confused over the definition of CMS being used here - I'm used
to it being used to refer to a system which does the lot - user input,
site and database management, output formats, conversions, archiving,
etc.
If Daisy did
David Crossley wrote:
Ross Gardler wrote:
...
I don't know what to do about this. At the least
i thought to send this mail because the Forrest PMC
should be aware that there is something happening that
could be damaging for our project. People are gumbling.
We need to encourage them to grum
Paul Bolger wrote:
Actually, I should say, I do think that partnering wth a CMS that does
this stuff is the way to go. Forrest should not attempt to become a CMS.
My apologies for forking this discussion somewhat.
I was more referring to using an Xforms or Cocoon forms interface to
control li
> Actually, I should say, I do think that partnering wth a CMS that does
> this stuff is the way to go. Forrest should not attempt to become a CMS.
My apologies for forking this discussion somewhat.
I was more referring to using an Xforms or Cocoon forms interface to
control linking, input docume
Ross Gardler wrote:
> David Crossley wrote:
> >
> >I don't quite know the history of Incubator, but i presume
> >that people got excited about eating Apache dogfood and
> >decided to go with Forrest. Perhaps the original proponents
> >moved on. Now it seems that people are not happy with it,
> >fin
Ross Gardler wrote:
Paul Bolger wrote:
...
Point taken. Maybe this is another red herring, but would an Xforms
front end for site.xml be possible?
Yes (or rather yes to Cocoon Forms). I've been thinking about this, on
and off for a long time, but never really got started on it. The main
Paul Bolger wrote:
I agree, to an extent, with your observations. However, are you aware
that Eclipse can be deployed with a specific set of plugins (and minus
all the IDE stuff). This makes it reasonably lightweight and highly
focussed on a specific task.
I think if there were some way to avo
> I agree, to an extent, with your observations. However, are you aware
> that Eclipse can be deployed with a specific set of plugins (and minus
> all the IDE stuff). This makes it reasonably lightweight and highly
> focussed on a specific task.
I think if there were some way to avoid the online s
Paul Bolger wrote:
- A simple, intuitive way for non-XMLers to add things to site.xml
Have you any suggestions about what this may look like?
Not sure how technically possible this is, but how about a directory
parser which builds the site nav?
I replied to this in the new thread David c
Addi wrote:
Ross Gardler wrote:
...
Well I do have an itch for stupid clear docs. I did submit the
beginnings (mostly completed) of stupid clear docs for installing
Forrest - FOR-699 (http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FOR-699).
Oh dear, I see we have left that languishing in the issue
> >> - A simple, intuitive way for non-XMLers to add things to site.xml
> >
> >
> > Have you any suggestions about what this may look like?
Not sure how technically possible this is, but how about a directory
parser which builds the site nav? In other words the user would create
a directory struct
Ross Gardler wrote:
> Addi wrote:
>
>> Hm, well I don't know what resources the Apache projects are dealing
>> with but I have not implemented Forrest at my work (other than for me
>> to play with) because I am the only person who understands anything
>> about XML. The biggest hurdles I see at my
Addi wrote:
Hm, well I don't know what resources the Apache projects are dealing
with but I have not implemented Forrest at my work (other than for me to
play with) because I am the only person who understands anything about
XML. The biggest hurdles I see at my office are site.xml and the actu
Hm, well I don't know what resources the Apache projects are dealing
with but I have not implemented Forrest at my work (other than for me to
play with) because I am the only person who understands anything about
XML. The biggest hurdles I see at my office are site.xml and the actual
documents
David Crossley wrote:
(Sorry, this got too long but i reckon it is important.)
As you know, various people are using Forrest.
For some see: http://forrest.apache.org/live-sites.html
We can only presume they are well aware of what they are doing.
They have chosen to use the pre-1.0 software. The
17 matches
Mail list logo
