Alex Karasulu wrote: > If we had this out in public we can get more info from Niclas and BJ who > have been discussing the J2ME API issues. > > Is there anything on this email that requires us to keep it private?
Er, this is public :-) > Upayavira wrote: >> It seems to me that we rest very close to being able to graduate. >> >> There seem to me to be two remaining issues: >> >> = the Microedition license = >> Did we come to a conclusion that anyone can act upon here? > > Still trying to figure out the legalities. Can we redistribute the OSGi > version of this jar? Again nice to have Niclas and BJ comment some more. Yep. >> = the incubator.apache.org/felix website = >> This is currently effectively a single page site. This may be okay >> for an incubating project, but it certainly isn't for a TLP. I'm not >> sure when we would need to deal with this (i.e. before or after >> graduation), but we will need to. > > Oh I'd say we need this before. I don't want it to be a red light. We > need a real site here. We can copy the layout of an existing website > and fill it in using confluence info. That'd be great. > I had written a crappy little program to pull pages from confluence and > spit out xdocs but it's a mess. Some say maven's doxia plugin can do > this. We need to ask the maven peeps about this so we can reuse the > confluence doco for our static site. > > This way confluence can become an authoring tool as opposed to serving > dynamic pages which we just cannot do. Pier has a plugin that spits out static pages from Confluence. The issue is more how those pages get from Brutus (the box running Confluence) onto Minotaur/Ajax whilst passing through SVN (an infra requirement to make it easy to rebuild sites without understanding the underlying technology). >> We'll need to have some basic documentation for Felix - maybe an >> introductory tutorial - stuff that a newcomer is likely to want to read. >> Maybe we have this stuff already, in which case great, we just need to >> move it to incubator.apache.org/felix. > > +1 > >> Now, as far as the question of what technology to use (Confluence or >> Maven), I'd propose we continue to use Confluence for our wiki, but just >> make do with Maven for now for our main site. Maven works in a way that >> fits into the Apache infrastructure as it is right now, so life with it >> will be easier. >> >> Thoughts on all of this? > > My maven comments were made above. Once again if we use doxia to > transform and dump doco from confluence then we can use confluence as a > collaborative authoring tool. Personally, I'm not that fussed how it is done, so long as we have a volunteer. Are you offering? Regards, Upayavira
