I've done an experiment today to get a feel how much work it would be to split up the site from the product docs. It's doable but a lot of work with rather little benefit, it seems. I guess I'll bury the idea for now.
On 19.11.2008 14:02:28 Jeremias Maerki wrote: > Hi Vincent, > > well, I haven't thought this through, yet. I've just let ideas bubble up. > I agree that migrating the development tab over to the Wiki is probably > a good idea since the most current stuff is there anyway. Cleaning the > stale stuff is long overdue. It only confuses and misleads people. > > As for the project vs. product/release separation, I meant: > - project: Welcome, News, Download, how to get help etc. > - product/release: The actual product documentation (i.e. the manual) > plus additional resources (FAQ, changes, known issues...) > > At the moment we bundle the product documentation for 0.94 with the > release of 0.95 which is kind of strange. For the website, it makes > sense to have documentation for the last couple of releases plus trunk. > What's bugging me is copying the whole release folder and then updating > all links. If we had a separate project site, we could use the .htaccess > redirects to link to the latest release rather than replacing version > numbers (nearly) everywhere. In some places we might be able to work > with XInclude if necessary. Having a separate product setup might also > faciliate generating a site PDF that becomes the "FOP manual". > > I'm looking for ways to simplify our release checklist. Maybe I'll just > need one of those cold & gray winter Sundays to do an experiment locally. > If it works, we can actually implement it. > > As for migrating to a Wiki entirely: Some projects use Confluence to do > something like that. But I have no idea how good this works and if we > can still do cool things like auto-generate content and RSS feeds from > XML files in our repo. Furthermore, I'm not a fan of using commercial > tools for infrastructure of an open source project. > > > On 19.11.2008 12:25:28 Vincent Hennebert wrote: > > Hi Jeremias, > > > > Jeremias Maerki wrote: > > > Good idea. Going further, we could think about splitting the FAQ into a > > > project part and a product part. To make the release procedures easier > > > we might want to split the website into a project website and a > > > product/release website. What we have now just takes too much work which > > > is at least partly what keeps us from releasing more often (which we > > > should do). Just an idea (I would still need to find time to put action > > > behing words, though). > > > > I’m not sure of what you mean by project and product/release? AFAICT the > > sections of the website we update before a release are the sections > > relevant to the product, so we would still have roughly the same amount > > of work to do. As for myself, I didn’t even bother to update the > > ‘Development’ tab, which is mostly out-of-date now, when I took care of > > releases. > > > > Now there is also the wiki that I’d consider to be the ‘project’ > > website. I think it would make sense to move as many things as possible > > there, since it’s easier to manage, update, modify, etc. For us as well > > as for contributors, who wouldn’t have to look for source files hidden > > deep inside the source tree, submit patches that then require review, > > commit, build, publish, wait a couple of hours for changes to appear, > > etc. > > > > On a more extreme side, the whole website might also be converted into > > a wiki... > > > > > > > On 18.11.2008 12:14:41 Vincent Hennebert wrote: > > >> Guys, > > >> > > >> What do you think of removing entries in the FAQ section that are > > >> specific to 0.20.5 and earlier versions? This would make it shorter, so > > >> less likely to scare people away, and in the same time easier for them > > >> to find the answer to their question. Plus it would stress the fact that > > >> we no longer support 0.20.5. > > > > My 2 cents, > > Vincent > > > > > Jeremias Maerki Jeremias Maerki