Ok here is some doco but there was something more extensive written by Pierre. I will CC him in case my link is wrong:
http://cwiki.apache.org/DIRxPMGT/web-site-management.html Alex On 5/21/07, Alex Karasulu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Yeah and there is some doco on this that we have... Let me post the link to it ... Alex On 5/21/07, Chris Custine < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > 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? > > > > > > > > >
