Greg Monroe wrote: > > 1) It is still undecided whether we want to include documentation with the > > binary releases. Currently they only contain the jar and their > > dependencies. > > AFAIK, there is no requirement for this. I do think it's important for folks > to be able to be able to access offline docs for a specific version. But the > binary jars does not seem to be the right place for this. I'd say that there > docs should be in the source or a separate download and the binary distro > readme should point to where they can be downloaded.
Ok, I'll see what I can do. Not sure how this would complicate the build process. I'll have a look. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TORQUE-237 >... > > 3) We need to switch the site publishing mechanism to svnpubsub until the > > end of year [1]. So some change in the site publishing mechanism is > > needed. We need to consider the following: > > - We need a location for the site in svn (currently the "default > location" > > db/torque/site is occupied by the torque 3 site project, see also (5)) > > - We probably want to retain the documentation for older releases > > - It should be no hassle to create a new site version directory (as we now > > have for the old docs of 3.1, 3.2, and the new 4.0 but not the current > > 3.3 docs) > > The strategy Thomas F proposes seems OK. E.g. site-svnpubsub with subdirs for > each release. Maybe scm-site or site-scm would be a shorter name? I have now used site-scmpublish as a temporary name. It seems, however, that the final location will be at https://svn.apache.org/repos/infra/websites/production/db/torque, so this directory will go away. > ... > BTW - Did any notices of the beta release go out? E.g. in the site news and > to torque-users? If folks don't know it's there, they probably won't test > with their local code. Yes, there were messages sent to the dev and user lists, as well as an announcement on the news page on the torque web site.. > > 5) Do we want to reorganize svn by putting the torque 3 resources into a > > separate place ? > > +1... but we should make sure it's well noted in the site. This means > that folks with local projects that pull from svn will need to update > their local settings. When such stuff breaks, it should be easy to find > a notice that the structure has changed. > > Maybe there should be some "pre-notices" too. E.g, a note on the site, > to this list, and to torque-user that the svn structure will change on > a specific date (or date range). ok, will do that. > > > 6) I'd like to improve the online docs further by dropping the strict > > separation between modules in the docs. > > +1 - I think this would allow for some needed overview and "rabbit trail" > type organization. E.g., what to read to understand using torque > vs what to read for modifying/developing topics. > > I think we sort of have this now, but you have to understand which > sub-project you need... which you don't until you start learning things. Lol. Yes, this is one of the problems I'd like to adress. Thomas --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
