Sorry for the late response. But I thought it is better late than never.

Anyway, I personally do not think this is a good idea. Let me take each
of the advantages Lawrence had put.

> 1) It's easy to update
If you keep this in svn, how difficult it is to update it. It is just a
matter of looking at the docs using viewSVN, checking out the file and
editing it. If you are a Woden dev, you already have docs checked out,
if all the docs are inside xdocs or some doc folder inside your Woden svn.
If I interpret, easy to update as to easy for the developers, hmm, I
don't think so. Do you think changing an html in your box and committing
is difficult than updating a wiki? I don't think so. You can even do the
changes offline, if you have the docs in svn repo.

If I interpret, easy to update as to easy for the other user, let me
come to that in the next point.

> 2) Non-committers can update the content as well as committers

This involves lot of problems. If some one randomly comes and changes
the docs, then we all are in trouble until some one notices that. If
some one is really like to help with Woden docs, then most probably he
must have good knowledge on svn and all. So he can easily checkout the
file, change it and apply patch.

From my Axis2 experiences, we are getting lot of patches to our docs
which are in the svn repo itself.

And moving them to wiki will create more trouble during distributions.
These days I find it difficult to understand some stuff in Woden without
documentation. I attached Woden docs and debugging Woden code to
understand some stuff. So it is better to have docs distributed with a
releaes, rather than referring to a wiki.
Take most of the projects in Apache. They do distribute docs with their
binary distro. Moving docs to wiki, will hinder this process until
confluence or some thing like that is setup for Woden.

So will all these, I'd like to keep docs inside the svn repo of Woden.

-- Chinthaka

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply via email to