OK - I've checked in my first pass at these changes... for the moment I've just moved the content that was not being referenced into an "old" directory to give people a chance to review and resurrect it if it is still useful.
The generation of the single html file no longer takes place. -- Rob On 26 April 2012 17:40, Robbie Gemmell <[email protected]> wrote: > On 26 April 2012 15:07, Rob Godfrey <[email protected]> wrote: >> OK, just checking... >> >> Unless anyone objects I'd like to do the reorganization ASAP so we can >> then start adding useful docs. >> >> The other question I forgot to ask is... >> >> Do we need to keep on generating the "single large page" HTML version >> in addition to the PDF and chunked HTML. I can't really see any >> advantage to it - so anyone object to me killing its production? >> >> -- Rob > > We didnt link it from the site for quite some time even though it was > being built so I raised the topic of deleting it as a result. It > eventually got linked to instead, but I still dont think its that > useful and remain +1 for deleting it. > > Robbie > >> >> On 26 April 2012 16:04, Weston M. Price <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Hey Rob, >>> No, we currently don't have one. I thought with re-organizing things >>> it might be a good time to do it. >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Weston >>> >>> On Apr 26, 2012, at 9:55 AM, Rob Godfrey wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Weston, >>>> >>>> does the book exist currently? >>>> >>>> All I'm talking about right now is re-organising the current >>>> documentation and removing unused stuff. I don't see a current JCA >>>> book being published. >>>> >>>> -- Rob >>>> >>>> On 26 April 2012 15:32, Weston M. Price <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> I think JCA probably warrants it's own book since there are significant >>>>> differences from just 'general' client programming. >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> >>>>> Weston >>>>> On Apr 26, 2012, at 8:12 AM, Rob Godfrey wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> All, >>>>>> >>>>>> I think we'd all agree our project documentation is not all it could >>>>>> be. I've started taking a look at at least making a start on tidying >>>>>> up some of the docs so that they a) present better and b) are easier >>>>>> for us to maintain. I'm looking at the DocBook content at the moment >>>>>> and I'm trying to get a handle on our current documentation set. >>>>>> >>>>>> As far as I can tell, we currently publish the following three "books" >>>>>> from the DocBook sources >>>>>> >>>>>> * AMQP Messaging Broker (Implemented in C++) >>>>>> * AMQP Messaging Broker (Implemented in Java) >>>>>> * Programming in Apache Qpid: Cross-Platform AMQP Messaging in Java >>>>>> JMS, .NET, C++, and Python >>>>>> >>>>>> The DocBook files we have also contain information for building a >>>>>> monolithic single book which aggregates all these documents, as well >>>>>> as including some other files which are not included in the above. >>>>>> However, as far as I can tell, we are not publishing this. >>>>>> >>>>>> All the content files, used and unused, are housed in a single >>>>>> directory with no structure. >>>>>> >>>>>> What I would like to do immediately is the following: >>>>>> >>>>>> 1) Create a directory structure which reflects the actual organisation >>>>>> of the documentation, something like >>>>>> >>>>>> cpp-broker >>>>>> java-broker >>>>>> client-programming >>>>>> common >>>>>> >>>>>> and move existing files into the appropriate sub-directory. >>>>>> >>>>>> 2) Remove the (seemingly unused) ability to create a monolithic book >>>>>> >>>>>> 3) Remove all content which is not referenced within the published books. >>>>>> >>>>>> 4) Write a proper makefile which actually works :-) >>>>>> >>>>>> Once this has been completed, the remaining content will obviously >>>>>> need to be reviewed... and in the medium term I am hoping that we can >>>>>> move more and more documentation to be "common" between the brokers. >>>>>> However, I think the above is probably a necessary prerequisite. >>>>>> >>>>>> Are people happy with this approach? Is there anything in the >>>>>> "unpublished" documentation that should be saved? >>>>>> >>>>>> -- Rob >>>>>> >>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >>>>> >>>> >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >>>> >>> >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >>> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
