Hi Tim !

Tim Funk wrote:

The drawback (which is a good drawback!) is the tomcat4 and tomcat5 links below contain many files and can easily grow to many more as it becomes more comprehensive.

Thanks, Tim !

The docs are not FAQ worthy but definitely worth linking to from the FAQ.

Well, the documents weren't written to be a FAQ, and I think the structure does not lend itself well to a FAQ. The reason why I wrote it that way was because a lot of answers in FAQs assume or require a level of understanding that newbie Tomcat administrators may not possess. Instead of trying to cover the background and theory behind every question, I thought a "walk-through" tutorial would be a more effective way of building up understanding of the product.



Here is my preference ...
Copy the content of http://cymulacrum.net/writings/tomcat5/book1.html and http://cymulacrum.net/writings/tomcat4/book1.html to the Wiki.


The book (after being copied to wiki) could be linked from the above links OR we could create a new link in the FAQ.

This way - anyone may maintain/add/edit the content without needing any additional privledges.

Actually, I like the Wiki idea, but maybe more along the lines of the MySQL documentation (http://www.mysql.com/doc/en/index.html), where users can add sections and comments. This would maintain the "narrative integrity" while allowing for digressions.

I like it when many different people can(and do) write docs. Even if 10 people write about the same thing - they may say it in different ways, have a different nuance with their writing style, or emphasis a particular problem they had which can be helpful to such a diverse audience.

I think we need more people writing docs for Tomcat. Though installation and basic configuration is covered quite well, and there is a LOT of stuff out there on Apache connectors, some advanced stuff, like writing your own realms or JNDI realms, or even the recent discussions about JNDI datasources are not covered -- or if they are, not adequately.



Some people may be thinking this is kludgey. Yes it is. But I think its an OK tradeoff so we can keep the barrier of documentation creation low.


Here, here. But I need to say a little something about my documents. The original document is actually in Docbook format, and I generate the HTML from that document using docbook utilities. If you want to put it into the Wiki, you'll need only the HTML (without the masthead), am I right ? I've never used Wiki before, so I may need help here.



--
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from
religious conviction." -- Blaise Pascal
+----------------------------------------------------------------+
| Pascal Chong |
| email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
| |
| Please visit my site at : http://cymulacrum.net |
| If you're using my documentation, please read the Terms and |
| and Conditions at http://cymulacrum.net/terms.html |
+----------------------------------------------------------------+




---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Reply via email to