An interesting example might be Apache Subversion. Go to their project page here:
http://subversion.apache.org/ Notice the link that says "Read the official Subversion documentation online!" That takes you to a non-Apache site: http://svnbook.red-bean.com/ If you look at the feedback section it shows that issues are tracked at code.google.com So in that case, there was a usual manual, apparently created and maintained outside of Apache, that is called "official Subversion documentation". However, it does not appear that the document is distributed as part of the official Subversion source distribution. This is a little confusing. Maybe one of our mentors can explain how this works. What makes this documentation "official"? Presumably the project's PMC endorses it and permits a link to it. -Rob On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 5:05 PM, Jean Weber <[email protected]> wrote: > Trying to clarify some basic parameters... > > I can understand the desire (requirement?) for "official" user docs to > be within the Apache system, but it is really necessary for user > guides to be "official"? (Sorry, my terminology is probably bad.) > > Could user guides and/or other material be provided as "community > documentation"? Is that allowed within Apache projects? Or just not > considered desirable here? > > --Jean >
