I've made the changes as agreed. I didn't touch the release pages. Removed the javadoc, release notes pages and pointer to inactive Aries blog. I've also updated the 'programming model' page to be a more comprehensive (but high-level) list of technologies available in Aries: http://aries.apache.org/documentation/ariesprogrammingmodel.html
Anyone: feel free to make additional changes... Cheers, David On 4 June 2013 13:53, Jeremy Hughes <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi David, > > I made some comments and votes largely in line with what's been > discussed... > > On 4 June 2013 12:24, David Bosschaert <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 28 May 2013 14:43, Daniel Kulp <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> > >> On May 27, 2013, at 10:18 AM, David Bosschaert < > [email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> > Downloads > >> > * This page was last updated for the 1.0.0 release train and I wonder > >> > whether we need it. All this info is available in Maven Central, can > we > >> not > >> > simply remove it? > >> > * Release notes. Since we are now supporting modular releases, do > central > >> > release notes make sense? I would simply remove this page. > >> > * Archived releases - again, can we simply leverage Maven central for > >> this? > >> > >> No for 1 and 3. Per Apache policy, the releases must be downloadable > from > >> the Apache mirror network and old releases available from > >> archive.apache.org/dist. > >> > >> > > I didn't hear any objections to the other suggestions I made. If nobody > > shouts soon I'll make the changes I outlined in my original email (pasted > > below for reference) with the exception of the items pointed out by Dan > > above. > > > > Again - we can always add any of these pages back later if we want. I > just > > want to get rid of as much stuff that is blatantly out of date... > > > > Cheers, > > > > David > > > > ---- > > Original mail: > > > > Hi all, > > > > I had a quick browse through the Aries website and noticed that there are > > quite a number of outdated pages. In some cases it was easy to update the > > pages to more recent info (e.g. for the latest OSGi specs) but in other > > cases I would propose the simply remove the outdated information. If > > someone has the time to provide a replacement this can then be done > later. > > > > Here's what I found: > > > > Documentation > > * Programming Model: The Application model has since been superseded by > the > > standardised Subsystems. Proposal: remove Application bullets. > > +0. Would be good to keep it there but in a 'superceded' section. > > > * Pointers to OSGi specs: I updated these to point to R5 (was 4.2). > > +1 to keeping this up to date. > > > * Javadoc: this incomplete lists of modules points at old versions > (0.3). I > > would propose to delete this page as this info is available in the > > published javadoc maven artefacts. > > +1 > > > > > Downloads > > * This page was last updated for the 1.0.0 release train and I wonder > > whether we need it. All this info is available in Maven Central, can we > not > > simply remove it? > > -1 Like Dan says, our releases must be available from > www.apache.org/dist and having a list of the releases is the best way > of getting to them. > > > * Release notes. Since we are now supporting modular releases, do central > > release notes make sense? I would simply remove this page. > > +1. Each release should get a set of release notes in JIRA. It would > be nice to have this linked from the main downloads page. > > > * Archived releases - again, can we simply leverage Maven central for > this? > > -1 Like Dan say. > > > > > Community > > * Aries group blog - hasn't been active since 2010. Should we remove this > > link from the menu? > > +0 > > > > > I don't really have the time to completely polish up the website but I > > would be happy to make the above changes to ensure that the obsolete info > > is gone. > > > > Thoughts anyone? > > Cheers, > > > > David >
