Mark Leicester wrote:
I think you are right, I probably have dismissed the "existing stuff" a bit early. In that case, I pledge to keep in touch with the current effort. I certainly value ongoing dialogue. However, I wonder out loud: should we be putting documentation behind the barrier of committership at all? I'm a community post-defined kind of person.
Finally some real issue.
Yes, I agree with you: code commits and docs commits are separate things. The HTTPD project already contains this notion of separate committership. I would be in *TOTAL* favor of giving docs committership to a separate SVN module a lot faster.
But it's also true that editing xml files in a svn repository sucks as an editing tool. Using wiki (or daisy or other solutions) is much better.
I like the notion of
daisy -> forrest -> out
makes very good sense.
Now we just need to find a way to automate a little that workflow, but without introducing security vulnerabilities.
As I said above, over the next few weeks I'll attempt to demonstrate what I imagine to be the myriad of potential benefits of the Drupal approach.
Great.
-- Stefano.
