Ah-ha! the culprit!!! 8o)
Adam.
On Friday 13 July 2001 03:36, you wrote:
Adam Fowler at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
*being random* The RPM of tc4 worked great on Mandrake 8.0 beta 3.
Incidentally, the tc4 docs suck. I had to read deeply into the config
files to find out how to get it
Anyway, I agree with Rob. I would like to see a committer
bring at least
#1 to a vote at this point. That way we can at least get the
From Craig and Pier, we have a negative on the applicability of TC3-TC4
docs. I believe Henri thinks otherwise. Would any other knowledgeable
parties care
I was off the list for a while. I tried to read through the
archives but all
the vitriol gave me a headache. Did they just agree to
disagree? Do you
think there'll be a problem with proposing to remove the 3.2
docs from the site?
From what I remember, 3.3 is a major refactoring of
*being random* The RPM of tc4 worked great on Mandrake 8.0 beta 3.
Incidentally, the tc4 docs suck. I had to read deeply into the config files
to find out how to get it working with apache. This is fine for a seasoned
admin, but the general web community wouldn't have a clue (By that I refer
Adam Fowler at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
*being random* The RPM of tc4 worked great on Mandrake 8.0 beta 3.
Incidentally, the tc4 docs suck. I had to read deeply into the config files
to find out how to get it working with apache. This is fine for a seasoned
admin, but the general web
Unless and until there's a 3.3 or 4.0 final release, *3.2* is the latest
Tomcat release, and deserves to be documented on the web site.
Ah, but that's exactly my point. I see two versions of Tomcat docs up there
now and I'm like, wtf? Why have the 3.3 docs online then? Now that I've
RTFM,
Craig R. McClanahan wrote:
On Mon, 9 Jul 2001, Alex Chaffee wrote:
Bundle the 3.2.x docs with 3.2.x and only have the 3.3 docs online (latest
Tomcat release). If you want the 3.2.x docs, get them with the binary or
whatever. I certainly don't think we should keep old versions of
I like this compromise. I will propose that we get rid of
the 3.2 docs
on the site -- once I'm convinced they're similar enough.
There's still
that old 3.3 is a rogue release sentiment floating around,
and people
might not appreciate giving 3.3 implied legitimacy by making it the
OK, but my point is that as we improve the 3.x docs --
regardless of the
value of x -- the 3.2 docs will become less relevant.
Right now there are many differences between the 3.2 and 3.3 docs, but
they're mostly in the connector docs, which AFAIK haven't
changed much if at
all in
Yeah, I guess anarchy will be a little too... anarchic :-) (Rob S. made
the point more strongly in his latest message.)
PDF conversion would be pretty cool... Anyone feel like coming up with a
sheet to generate XSL:FO? =)
If someone is scared of XML, they can submit it to us in text format
Things To Do before we decide on format or CVS:
* Look at the latest TOC and make comments
* Pick a section or subsection and start writing :-)
* Look at http://tomcatbook.sourceforge.net/ and
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/tcbook and see if there's anyone there to
recruit, or if effort
PDF conversion would be pretty cool... Anyone feel like
coming up with a
sheet to generate XSL:FO? =)
Good idea, we should find help on xml.apache.org.
If someone is scared of XML, they can submit it to us in
text format and
we can go add tags (as time permits), but we're all
developers
PDF conversion would be pretty cool... Anyone feel like coming up with a
sheet to generate XSL:FO? =)
No problem, I can help out on this issue
regards, tom
Rob S. wrote:
The tough thing about separating the docs is that the server.xml config
stuff is spread out among multiple files. I wonder how difficult it would
be to maintain an index, or even if it's necessary.
I don't think it's a big deal. I forgot to list the appendices, but one of
Rob S. wrote:
I like this compromise. I will propose that we get rid of the 3.2 docs
on the site -- once I'm convinced they're similar enough. There's still
that old 3.3 is a rogue release sentiment floating around, and people
might not appreciate giving 3.3 implied legitimacy by making it
on 7/10/01 4:06 AM, Rob S. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
PDF conversion would be pretty cool... Anyone feel like coming up with a
sheet to generate XSL:FO? =)
We have started that here:
http://jakarta.apache.org/cvsweb/index.cgi/jakarta-velocity/whiteboard/dave
b/pdfvsl/
Not perfect yet because
On Mon, 9 Jul 2001, Alex Chaffee wrote:
Bundle the 3.2.x docs with 3.2.x and only have the 3.3 docs online (latest
Tomcat release). If you want the 3.2.x docs, get them with the binary or
whatever. I certainly don't think we should keep old versions of
documentation updated. I
On Tue, 10 Jul 2001, Alex Chaffee wrote:
Rob S. wrote:
The tough thing about separating the docs is that the server.xml config
stuff is spread out among multiple files. I wonder how difficult it would
be to maintain an index, or even if it's necessary.
I don't think it's a big
I was out of town for the holiday, so I have just read almost all of
this ex post facto. It looks like there are quite a few people, myself
included, willing to devote an appreciable amount of time to an informal
new group of doc wrangers. When I originally jumped into this thread
early on, I had
On the topic of a new mailing list:
I think we can do the next steps inside the tomcat-dev list or on our
own. (BTW, let's use DOC: as a prefix so it's easier to scan for new
messages.) I want to do this in full view of the rest of the community,
mostly so they can see what's going on and
On the topic of a new mailing list:
I think we can do the next steps inside the tomcat-dev list or on our
own. (BTW, let's use DOC: as a prefix so it's easier to scan for new
messages.) I want to do this in full view of the rest of the community,
mostly so they can see what's going on and
Preamble: grumble grumble =)
I don't want to rush it.
Agreed, but at the same time, I'd like to decide sooner than later. I'm on
co-op until August 24th, then I start full-time school again. 4 courses
doesn't leave a lot of room for TC docs. Judging by the amount of progress
we've made
Martin van den Bemt wrote:
On the topic of a new mailing list:
I think we can do the next steps inside the tomcat-dev list or on our
own. (BTW, let's use DOC: as a prefix so it's easier to scan for new
messages.) I want to do this in full view of the rest of the community,
mostly so they can see
Rob S. wrote:
Preamble: grumble grumble =)
I don't want to rush it.
Agreed, but at the same time, I'd like to decide sooner than later. I'm on
co-op until August 24th, then I start full-time school again. 4 courses
doesn't leave a lot of room for TC docs. Judging by the amount of
Not to be pushy or anything, but I'd like to get these settled quickly so we
can get down to writing some docs =) Does a committer want to call a vote
on these two things? Are we ready to do that yet?
1) Tomcat documentation per-project or in a single repository?
2) What is the format (XML,
25 matches
Mail list logo
