Pardon me for saying, but it sort of seems like you're missing the point. Not everyone has the expertise, time, or basic "starter" knowledge to know how to do what you describe. This is the real value of docs.
I understand that this is a project just now nearing the 1.0 release, but it seems to me that the single biggest strength of Ant is its community. Ant was very accessible in terms of extension, partly because of it's simple task mechanism, and partly because that task mechanism was well-supported by documentation. The sourceModification question isn't the only one lingering, and I find that the architecture of the project, in terms of what basic info a build manager needs to tweak in order to do text file filtering, for example, isn't accessible, except perhaps by digging into parts of the project that should be abstracted away from him. At work, I am currently converting all of our project deployments to be mavenized, so rest assured that in due time I will contribute what I know to be solid fact about the functioning of maven. As I said before, I think it's a wonderful product already. However, the complexity of the subject matter makes it a complex product, and this complexity should be insulated from Joe User as much as possible. In this case, the documentation becomes a critical piece in the project's architecture. IMHO, of course. :) John On Thu, 2002-12-12 at 19:29, Aslak Helles�y wrote: > Just a tip: Every time I need to figure out how to do something and it isn't > covered in the docs (which is most of the time, since Maven doesn't have an > automatic self-documentation feature yet), I always look at the plugin > source code. That is, the jelly script. Now, as an exercise, I looked at the > java plugin's plugin.jelly to find the solution of the problem you mentioned > as an example: > > I do a file serach for "<javac", and I find the right plugin (java). In that > file, I search for "<javac" again, and I find that the path with id > java.compile.src.set defines the classes to compile. Then I dig some more to > find out how to define that path, and I've got it. Allright, it might take > 10 minutes. > > The thing I want to stress here is that if you think the docs are too poor > but continue to use the program, then why not contribute yourself with some > docs about the problems you just solved? I'm really tired of freeriders that > complain about open source software. You get something for free, remember. > There is a whole spirit about OSS that needs to be grasped here. > > Sure, good docs are always needed for newbies. -And newbies are sometimes > the best to produce docs, because they see the problem from a different > angle. So contribute! > > Aslak > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: John Casey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: 13. desember 2002 00:08 > > To: Turbine Maven Users List > > Subject: Re: Next release? > > > > > > +1000000000 > > > > As a relative newbie to Maven, but a veteran of Ant, I can't agree > > enough. I have personally made an ass out of myself several times > > asking stupid questions on the irc channel. However, for me these were > > basic questions that I couldn't find the answer to. Once, I was > > referred to a project on a completely unrelated site as an example. Or, > > in the worst case, I have spent _hours_ digging through someone else's > > code (and consequently someone else's mind) looking for where a > > particular feature is implemented, so that I could see _how_ it works. > > > > Perfect example: Try to create a project.xml that only compiles > > _some_of_ the classes in the source tree you're referring to. I had to > > check the Commons-logging project.xml for that one. > > > > I have a full-time job, and can't really afford the weeks-long > > investment required to understand how to configure a project, let alone > > contribute to it. > > > > Don't get me wrong, I love the concept of Maven, but if there is no > > documentation the only developers you will ever have are (a) the ones > > you already have, or (b) any people who have _nothing_ else to do. > > Plus, you need good documentation to support the droves of people out > > there just looking to give you a popularity vote in JDJ or > > JavaPro...that's definitely worth something. > > > > Just my 2c. > > > > John > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, 2002-12-12 at 12:43, Henri Yandell wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Thu, 12 Dec 2002, Henning P. Schmiedehausen wrote: > > > > > > > Rafal Krzewski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > > > > >Henning P. Schmiedehausen wrote: > > > > > > > > >> Is "documentation" one of the 2-3 serious things left to do? > > > > > > > > >Documentation is nice but working code is better :-) My > > experience with > > > > >OSS shows that docs lie on the far end of the priority list. > > The people > > > > > > > > And that's why there are bazillons of abandoned, half-finished or > > > > simply not usable OSS projects. > > > > > > A full-hearted +1. > > > > > > Documentation is nice, working code is good, but community is better. > > > > > > Good documentation leads to community. Working code without a > > community is > > > not good OSS. > > > > > > [from having sat on the sidelines on Maven for a year now] > > > > > > The early Maven documentation was simply amazing and along with Jason's > > > fervent drive were the two things that turned Maven from an > > idea into the > > > next generation project it is. > > > > > > The documentation slipped as it had to handle multiple versions at the > > > same time and as the amount of time spent documenting was less than the > > > amount of time spent coding new features. > > > > > > It reached a bad point where the online docs were just plain wrong, but > > > has since improved so that they are correct, but new features > > seem to take > > > time to fully appear, and concepts like Best-Use-Guides and multi-level > > > tutorials are not there yet. > > > > > > Even as a 'user' who is sitting and waiting for documentation to appear > > > for some features [if anyone wants to write a Reactor tutorial, I'd owe > > > you a beer] I still think that Maven 1.0 does not need great > > > documentation, but that the focus of work once Maven 1.0 is released > > > should be on tutorials, documentation and books. > > > > > > My tuppence, > > > > > > Hen > > > > > > > > > -- > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > For additional commands, e-mail: > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > For additional commands, e-mail: > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
