I know that I have proposed this before and then got the answer that
this was discussed already. Still I have the feeling that everybody
dislikes the current way we build our website.... so again a try :-)...
I would even go a step farther and do as much of the website on the wiki
as possible. Dan Kulp has written an exporter script that syncs the wiki
to static pages so the admins can live with it.
I think we have to try to make the website and documentation as open as
possible. The wiki allows us to give editing right to anyone with a
valid icla. That is much more accessible than the current site.
Additionally any change can be seen right after the change on the wiki.
I think that is a big motivation. Currently you have to submit a patch
for the website and wait for someone to commit it and then for someeone
else to sync it to the web. This process can take months sometimes. That
is quite frustrating and I am sure it is the reason why we have so few
updates to the site and documentation.
Another nice thing of the wiki is that it is a first step of
contribution below submitting patches. So people can come in contact
with the project gradually.
Of course the wiki has the problem that it is not synched to the
releases but in cxf and camel this is also not the case. Still it works
well there. The way to couple the documentation to releases is to note
for example which attribute of a command has been introduced in which
version. This is niot perfect but works quite well in practice.
Christian
Am 17.06.2011 09:46, schrieb Jean-Baptiste Onofré:
Agree Andreas,
I think that:
- link to the wiki "cap" page in the community area of the website
- wiki pages as children of the "cap" page
is the most efficient way.
Regards
JB
--
Christian Schneider
http://www.liquid-reality.de
Open Source Architect
http://www.talend.com
