No buttons or "More Actions" yet. Can you do it for now until my authorization is higher?
Thanks Troy -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Chen, Pei Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2012 10:10 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: Apache Confluence wiki for documentation? Added you in Jira... try now... > -----Original Message----- > From: Bleeker, Troy C. [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2012 11:08 AM > To: '[email protected]' > Subject: RE: Apache Confluence wiki for documentation? > > I was only able to comment on the JIRA issue. How does one reopen it? > > Thanks > Troy > -----Original Message----- > From: ctakes-dev-return-451- > [email protected] [mailto:ctakes-dev-return- > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Masanz, > James J. > Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2012 5:33 PM > To: '[email protected]' > Subject: RE: Apache Confluence wiki for documentation? > > No objection from me for Confluence. Thanks for the investigation! > The contents for 3.0-incubating will definitely need a lot of updating > but I'm hoping for 2.6-incubating it won't need much. > > -- James > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: ctakes-dev-return-450- > [email protected] > > [mailto:ctakes-dev-return-450- > [email protected] > > rg] > > On Behalf Of Chen, Pei > > Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2012 5:26 PM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: RE: Apache Confluence wiki for documentation? > > > > 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
