*being random* The RPM of tc4 worked great on Mandrake 8.0 beta 3.
Incidentally, the tc4 docs suck. I had to read deeply into the config files
to find out how to get it working with apache. This is fine for a seasoned
admin, but the general web community wouldn't have a clue (By that I refer to
the quantity of mails in tomcat-user!) 8o)
We could do with better tc4 docs.
Just sticking my neb in - I think a separate tree for 3.2+3.3 would be a bit
unnecessary.
Adam.
----
Adam Fowler
Help Desk Live Project
Information Services
University of Wales, Aberystwyth
Web guy+author on the TomcatBook Project
http://tomcatbook.sourceforge.net
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
----
On Wednesday 11 July 2001 15:26, you wrote:
> Craig R. McClanahan wrote:
> > On Mon, 9 Jul 2001, Alex Chaffee wrote:
> >>>Bundle the 3.2.x docs with 3.2.x and only have the 3.3 docs online
> >>> ("latest Tomcat release"). If you want the 3.2.x docs, get them with
> >>> the binary or whatever. I certainly don't think we should keep old
> >>> versions of documentation updated. I mean, why would updated 3.0 or
> >>> 3.1 docs be useful?
> >
> > Unless and until there's a 3.3 or 4.0 final release, *3.2* is the "latest
> > Tomcat release", and deserves to be documented on the web site.
>
> OK, but my point is that as we improve the 3.x docs -- regardless of the
> value of x -- the 3.2 docs will become less relevant.
>
> Right now there are many differences between the 3.2 and 3.3 docs, but
> they're mostly in the connector docs, which AFAIK haven't changed much if
> at all in operation. This leads me to conclude that the docs in the 3.3
> tree are just as valid when applied to 3.2, except that they're better
> docs, since more people have had a chance to revise them. That's why I'd
> like to remove the "Tomcat 3 docs that happened to be in the depot at the
> time 3.2 shipped" in favor of "the latest version of the Tomcat 3 docs
> (which happen to be in the 3.3 dev tree)".
>
> Perhaps the easiest way to do this would be with a separate depot. I'm
> shying away from that for the reasons you (Craig) brought up. It's nice
> for docs to be in the same depot as the code...
>
> > There's no reason to banish the current Tomcat released version, or any
> > other version that is being actively developed. And it's quite easy to
> > arrange the user interface so that it's obvious which version you are
> > looking at (for example, including "Tomcat X.Y" in the header or footer
> > of the pages about that version).
>
> Again, apart from 3 vs 4, the difference between versions 3.2 and 3.3 is
> small, as far as docs are concerned, so announcing "Tomcat 3.2" in the
> header wouldn't be very salient, and would just promote forking of docs. We
> seem to be in this quandary because the docs have not really been part of
> the release process -- they get released slapdash relative to the code
> milestones.
>
>
> By the way, it seems like the majority of the existing documentation is
> about installation. If there were a clean, robust install script, it would
> remove 90% of the text on the site. Maybe before we write (rewrite) install
> docs we should write an install script. I know that was on your todo list
> for 4 -- how's that coming?
