Jason,

Thank you for setting up the mavenusers space on confluence. While this solution is certainly better for integrating the documentation with Maven, it has the disadvantage that it significantly raises the bar for anyone who wants to contribute.

For example, unregistered users can't see its content, so they will not be drawn to improve on the documentation in the confluence wiki. In addition, anyone wishing to make a small contribution, will need to register, then send you an email, wait for the confirmation -- which will come quickly, I know, but will not be immediate. Most users will not bother.

Let me give a few examples of possible user contributions that would not make it into a registered-users-only wiki: 1. Someone asked in the mailing lists about which archetypes are available by default with maven. Brett answered that by providing a useful link to ibiblio. I thought that this would be useful information for me, followed the link and made a mental note to check back the mailing list when I need this info sometimes in the future. When we started the discussion on the wiki, I just went to the wiki, added three or four lines for the archetypes I had found when following the link. Now I know, where to find it. 2. I was looking through the guide to creating sites. There is a link to a description ("A full reference of the APT Format is available"). The link is dead. Of course I looked around a little more and found the full guide to the apt format. Of course I didn't bother sending this information to the mailing list. It looks like nit-picking but a wiki page would be ideal to put this information. 3. Yesterday Wendy Smoak noted in the mailing list that the guide for creating archetypes states that the <id> tag for the archetype.xml should be the same as the <artifactId> but that this is not the case for one of the plugins he used so the statement must be incorrect. It is very unlikely that an observation like this will be caught if we don't let the user who observes it contribute it easily.

I know that you have worked hard at the documentation for Maven. But Maven is huge and complex. It is very difficult to put everything that users need into writing. And it is probably difficult for any experienced maven user - let alone developer - to understand how hard it is to learn Maven.

In the past few weeks I have more than once regretted starting with Maven. It is a great tool, but whatever I start with, I find that it is so difficult to answer the basic questions that arise for the newbie. And I know that I am not the only one. It should not be like that (please don't take this as a criticism of the developers, I just think that there must be better ways to involve all of us in augmenting the documentation).

Would you see a big problem if we started a trial with the Wiki? There is not much that we can loose. If nobody contributes or it really gets defaced all the time, we just stop. We don't loose anything. On the other hand, maybe we really get some users involved who submit snippets of insights and we reduce the learning curve.

Would you really object if we wanted to launch a trial balloon for linking Maven documentation with the wiki?

- Alexander




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

Reply via email to