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

Reply via email to