All of those Howtos would be great and helped lots of people.
pavel
Chris K Chew wrote:
I have thought of three guides to write, but am not sure if they would be
helpful, or which to do first. Any suggestions?
* Multiple Site Howto -- How to organize classes and actions so that a
single turbine instance can serve multiple sites that may need to share
common functionality
* Service Howto/Introduction -- What services are, why they are nice, and
how to write them
* Non TDK Howto -- I found the TDK confusing because it did a bunch of stuff
that I didn't necessarily want. So I learned about Turbine by removing
everything, and putting it back in as I needed it. This document would be a
"tour" in the form of setting up an example app without using the TDK.
Thanks,
Chris
-----Original Message-----
From: Scott Eade [mailto:seade@;backstagetech.com.au]
Sent: Monday, November 11, 2002 5:03 PM
To: turbine-user
Subject: Documentation (was: Re: Thanks)
I had planned to conduct a review of the t2.2 documentation to
come up with
a list of things that need to be done to bring things up to scratch.
Unfortunately I am just too snowed under at the present to get to this.
I would be surprised (somewhat pleasantly) if someone steps
forward to take
up the challenge of bringing the documentation up-to-date. There are also
other issues that need to be considered, in particular I don't believe the
steps involved in extending the turbine schema have even been fully
developed (anecdotal evidence indicates that several users have attempted
this to varying degrees of success).
I think the best improvement we can hope for in the short term is for
specific incremental enhancements to existing documents to correct errors
and omissions. These could be posted to the list or better still
posted as
patches to the existing xdoc files. Updating the xdocs and producing the
patches can be a little intimidating at first, but it is pretty simple. I
am happy to process documentation suggestions from email through
to patches,
so if you want you can post a message to the list something like:
The ultimate solution to my problem was ... My life would have
been much easier if the ... document included the following text
just above/just below/replacing ...
... New or replacement text ...
I don't think we can expect someone to just step forward and solve this
problem. We ALL need to make contributions to achieve the
desired outcome.
I am not complaining about your rant, but if you could direct a similar
amount of energy to providing a small update to the existing documentation
that covered the issue at hand then we would be on our way.
Documentation patches are welcome. I will also try and assist by
processing
documentation suggestions contained in email messages through to patches.
Cheers,
Scott
--
Scott Eade
Backstage Technologies Pty. Ltd.
http://www.backstagetech.com.au
From: "Mitch Christensen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: "Turbine Users List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2002 15:36:44 -0800
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: FW: Thanks
A lot of people are pulling out a lot of hair over Turbine.
Turbine is a
great framework that *needs* to exist (I can find no reasonable
alternative). Unfortunately, it is so poorly documented that many folks
simply walk away after struggling with it.
You can measure this by the number of "Hi, I'm trying to get
Turbine working
but I keep getting an XXX error..." postings that come across,
and the user
is never to be heard from again.
Isn't there anyone out there that can spend a little time
cleaning up the
documentation for Turbine?
Right now, what Turbine needs is documentation, not new
features. If anyone
has attempted to extend the turbine schema in any way, or use Intake for
that matter. They quickly realize that it can be an exercise in
frustration, admittedly offset somewhat by the elation you feel when you
finally figure out (after days of searching) what could have
been documented
in a couple of hours.
I'm not being critical, it's just that I sympathize with Bill.
The bottom line is that I believe that Turbine should be
amassing a larger
user audience than it has (based on posting volumes to this
group), and I'm
not sure how much longer Turbine can survive without legitimate
documentation. (And I really think Turbine should survive)
Sorry for the rant.
-Mitch
-----Original Message-----
From: Bill [mailto:bhalpin@;collaborativefusion.com]
Sent: Monday, November 11, 2002 9:46 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Thanks
The TRP.action.login option was totally the problem!!!! Thank you so
much, I've been pulling my hair out over this. :)
-b
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
<mailto:turbine-user-unsubscribe@;jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail:
<mailto:turbine-user-help@;jakarta.apache.org>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
<mailto:turbine-user-unsubscribe@;jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail:
<mailto:turbine-user-help@;jakarta.apache.org>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:turbine-user-unsubscribe@;jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:turbine-user-help@;jakarta.apache.org>
