Apache Directory also uses the Confluence export plugin to produce
http://directory.apache.org and I think the setup works really well for that
site.  I am sure the setup and export template could be borrowed and used in
conjunction with some minor graphics work to improve the aesthetics of the
Felix site.  I think the organization of the ADS site also implements a
couple of the suggestions listed in this thread...

Chris

On 5/21/07, Richard S. Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Ultimately, I agree with everything you had to say about the web site,
except for the recommendation not to use a wiki. I don't have a love
affair with wikis and I agree that often they do not look good, but the
number one reason why I want to use a wiki is that I hate to do
documentation, but wikis make it reasonably easy for me to create
documentation or to make quick edits when I become aware of a mistake.
Thus, I find that I maintain wiki documentation more since it has a
lower barrier. I think this is important.

For example, on another thread today someone mentioned something about
the 'Launching and Embedding Felix' document, so I quickly jumped over
to the wiki page and tried to add a few sentence to the page to make a
specific issue more clear. It is nice to have this ease of
editing/deployment.

We just have to strive to have our statically generated pages not look
ugly...they perhaps need some work in this area now... :-)

-> richard

J Aaron Farr wrote:
> "Richard S. Hall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>
>> Matthias Luebken wrote:
>>
>>> I suggest that you update the website felix.apache.org so that the
>>> ongoing improvements are reflected on the website. If you don't look
>>> into the Jira Issue Tracker, you don't have the impression that there
>>> is much progress at Felix.
>>>
>> Agreed.
>>
>>
>
> I've mentioned more than once that I'd like to help on this front.
> The website is real weakness for Felix, IMHO.  Here are my thoughts on
> a good website:
>
>  - Very organized, quickly addresses the audience and helps them find
>    the rights spot (ie- who are you?  a developer of felix?  a user of
>    a plugin?  a user of some other software that happens to use felix?
>    interested in OSGI?...)
>
>  - VERSIONED documentation.  That is, the documents for Felix 0.8, 0.9
>    and 1.0 are all available and not erased.  This includes javadocs.
>
>  - Available with the downloads and if possible, in a printer friendly
>    format.
>
>  - Include more "how to use the software" documents than "how it works
>    internally" documents.  This means at least one decent tutorial.
>    Screencasts are even better.
>
> All of this is difficult, though possible, with a wiki.  I think
> wiki's are great for community created documentation but they must be
> well maintained, including pruning and re-organization.  A website
> should have a flow to it, and wiki's often don't.
>
> My personal preference is to author the documentation in some XML
> format and reserve the wiki for FAQ entries, quick whiteboarding of
> ideas, and soliciting community documentation.  Good articles from the
> wiki can then be pulled into the main, static site.
>
>
> That's my thoughts.  I'd like to contribute to Felix and the best way
> I could do that right now is with the website, but I'd like some
> feedback from the community before I either start hacking through the
> wiki or writing up huge amounts of docbook or xdoc.
>
> Thoughts?
>
>

Reply via email to