At 16:20 18.04.2002, Stas Bekman wrote:
Per Einar Ellefsen wrote:
- For the "People behind mod_perl" section, who should be mentioned? Doug is a given, Stas too, but I guess there are so many more I don't know about.. From the top of my head, I'd say Eric Cholet, Ask Bj�rn Hansen (?) .... I'm not really sure.
We'll need pictures (I found some from the mod_perl BOF, but maybe they aren't very representative), and descriptions (like how he came to mod_perl, what he does, etc..). Maybe if those who consider themselves fit to appear in that section could contribute some info about themselves?
I think this is too dangerous. How are you going to decide who has contributed enough to be included in the venerable list of those "behind mod_perl". Somebody will feel left out and it's a pity.
I suggest we simply say developed by Doug MacEachern with help from numerous other developers too many to list here.
Well, I think it would still be very interesting to have in-depth information about the most active contributors, including an image etc... Gives a more personal look.
sure, sounds good.
On the other hand there is this very outdated file: modperl/CREDITS, which if brought up to date could serve as such a document. Here you don't have a problem, you list everybody who has helped, and give some more description to those who has contibuted significantly more.
Yes, I saw this. I'll try and see what I can do with it.
Maybe have like an index page that lists all the authors, with links, and then for the pages of the most significant ones, more information with picture, several paragraphs, etc.
ok, the real problem will be to keep it up to date, but I guess it's not really an issue.
- About the 2.0 docs: should they be edited in-place or is there somewhere else they should be taken from (i.e. is this the main repository for them or is it the modperl-2.0 one?)
It's very simple, when you checkout modperl-2.0 modperl-docs/src/docs/2.0 are
checked out as modperl-2.0/docs, so they are the same docs. Very cool IMHO. One
source, zero hassle.
We should do the same for 1.0.
Well, as far as I can see, most of the 1.0 documentation is going stale anyway, so it shouldn't be that much of an issue. Most changes for 1.0 happen in the Guide anyway by now.
Actually I'm not working on the guide anymore, unless I get fixes and improvements. To me all the 1.0 docs are frozen, since I've enough work on the 2.0 front :)
I'm working on your huge patches now, Per Einar :)
How does this work? This is a cvs magick:
% cat CVSROOT/modules apachetest-alias -d Apache-Test httpd-test/perl-framework/Apache-Test modperl-docs-alias -d docs modperl-docs/src/docs/2.0/ modperl-2.0 modperl-2.0 &apachetest-alias &modperl-docs-alias
Oh ok, great then! But this means I'll have to watch myself a little :) Anyway, really great.
it is great! As good as it gets :)
__________________________________________________________________ Stas Bekman JAm_pH ------> Just Another mod_perl Hacker http://stason.org/ mod_perl Guide ---> http://perl.apache.org mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://use.perl.org http://apacheweek.com http://modperlbook.org http://apache.org http://ticketmaster.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
