On 8/17/11 11:12 AM, Alex Karasulu wrote:
On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 12:15 AM, Stefan Seelmann<[email protected]>wrote:
On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 11:06 AM, Emmanuel Lecharny<[email protected]>
wrote:
Last, not least, we need to improve the kerberos documentation. Many
users
complain about it. The truth is that we fixed some blocking issues those
last weeks, bugs that were killing our implementation as a valid
candidate
for a production kerberos server. But bugs are bugs, we can fix them.
OTOH,
with a pathetic documentation, we can't expect to have users testing the
kerberos server, and giving us some feedback about problems they found in
the code. Sadly, we need some workforce to deal with this problem...
I totally agree with that point. I played with Kerberos the last weeks
so I see it as my duty to contribute some documentation. But I'm
unsure what documentation system we should use. Felix did a great job
and moved all confluence pages to Docbook. But I know that at least
you (sorry, I won't blame you ;-) don't like Docbook XML. So should we
switch back to confluence?
The nice thing about docbook is that always us to generate any target and
manipulate formats with style sheets. I think it's idea even though it's
heavy. We just need a nice tool that allows us to edit docbook in a WYSIWYG
editor. This way one need not deal with XML directly.
I spent hours finding such hypothetical tools, and tested many of them.
They are all crap. really.
The fact that we need docbook format for our documentation is not
disputed here. I just say that we'd rather use a standard way to produce
the doco, then we convert it to docbook later, using a tool to do so.
--
Regards,
Cordialement,
Emmanuel Lécharny
www.iktek.com
