To throw in my view: I like the pdf's; and I think the idea of using a more easily approachable tool like OpenDocuments is definitely worth experimentation from the point of view of the ASF. It's easy to edit and work on - unlike most of the other documentation tools we have which are powerful and painful.
As a source medium, the zipped nature of odt's is a bit of a pain, but if we're against the idea of binary resources then I'd like to know why images are allowed; let's throw out everything but svg's. If it was a proprietary format, sure it'd be bad, but this is an open format for which there are free tools. I agree that losing the cvs diffs is a pain, but cvs comments are more important than diffs and it's not as if this is unchartered territory (images). So I can't say I agree with Ted; community is more than diffs - though patches are diffs and this means that the patches we get are going to be vaguer than usual (ie a piece of text telling a committer to add a paragraph etc). As for Daisy or Forrest (Noel's email); they seem like a lot of effort for two documents. Plus there's no one in the Roller community to set them up or support them. I reckon we should give it a shot and see how it goes. The lessons learned will go beyond Roller; it'll be good information for Apache as a whole. Hen On 1/24/06, Dave Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > For release notes, which can be updated even after the software is > released, we should still use the wiki. > > Doubters: what say you?
