No strong objections from me... But I think the contents itself needs updating though as I think there have been/will be significant changes to the paths/usage since the ASF move, etc.
> -----Original Message----- > From: Bleeker, Troy C. [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2012 6:13 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: Apache Confluence wiki for documentation? > > I looked at the markdown syntax of the ASF CMS that is where the cTAKES > Apache site is built. Using this for doc would mean migration from our > existing Confluence. Internet search revels this is not straight forward. > Others have issues with broken tables and what was macros. We don't need > the macros much but the tables are key to the existing doc. > > ASF CMS also has editing/staging/production. While it sounds nice, there is a > lag between. Maybe not big but if we don't need the function... Confluence > has version control for every single change that is made. You can revert back > easily. > > The WYSIWYG editor is super limited with markdown syntax ASF CMS. Tables > don't even exist. > > Since we have a previous Confluence investment and due to the differences > noted above, could I suggest/ask that we go ahead with requesting the ASF > Confluence be set up? (Reopen > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-5185) We should only need an > export from the old and import to the new. I have done this with Confluence > before as long as I have admin access. Close version proximity of Confluence > would be good though. cTAKES doc is currently in a Confluence 4.0 setup. > This would at least get us started as opposed being on the fence in > discussion. We can continue the discussion of ship/no ship of doc in parallel. > > Thanks > Troy > -----Original Message----- > From: ctakes-dev-return-422- > [email protected] [mailto:ctakes-dev-return- > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Chen, Pei > Sent: Monday, September 24, 2012 10:59 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: Apache Confluence wiki for documentation? > > Good points... I wonder if we could easily take an export/snapshot of the > online .mdtext,html,wiki, etc. version during build/release time. If it seems > reasonable, we could investigate creating a script or maven goal to export > from the content /site/ directory as an example (assuming content is there; > which is probably more important than the delivery mechanism at this > point)? > Just throwing out the option... > > My biggest pet peeve in the past with open software is that detailed > technical documentation never seems to be up-to-date with code that I end > up just viewing the source anyway. But a simple/general end user guide, > quick start examples, FAQ's/known gotchas, are always helpful. My 1/2 cent- > but I'll leave it up to the experts/volunteers in this realm... > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Jörn Kottmann [mailto:[email protected]] > > Sent: Saturday, September 22, 2012 5:43 PM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: Apache Confluence wiki for documentation? > > > > There are always smaller issues coming up when you release something. > > If there is a bigger issue the best thing in my experience is to just > > release again and get it fixed. Doesn't matter if it is something in > > your software or the documentation. For me its important that i can > > easily access the documentation for the software version I am running. > > > > When I use Open Source software which is not super stable yet and I > > have an issue I usually try out the trunk version and see how things > > work there, so in that case I would likely see your documentation update. > > > > Jörn > > > > On 09/14/2012 04:39 PM, Bleeker, Troy C. wrote: > > > Would you still say that if you knew that an issue with the product > > > you just > > spent 2 hours trying to work-around something could have been avoided > > if you were looking at the latest documentation? The difference in > > "ease of access" is minor, no? > > > > > > Thanks > > > Troy > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: ctakes-dev-return-388- > > [email protected] > > > [mailto:ctakes-dev-return-388- > > [email protected] > > > rg] On Behalf Of Jörn Kottmann > > > Sent: Friday, September 14, 2012 9:27 AM > > > To: [email protected] > > > Subject: Re: Apache Confluence wiki for documentation? > > > > > > On 09/14/2012 04:19 PM, Masanz, James J. wrote: > > >> I also prefer to not distribute the documentation with the release. > > > I actually prefer to have the documentation included in the > > > distribution, > > because then I can always easily access the documentation which > > matches the version I am working with and do not have to go somewhere > to find it. > > > > > > Jörn
