Provided that somehow this will (slowly, based on available time of maven devs) propagate back to the official Maven docs
On 11/12/05, Arik Kfir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Although I'm not part of the original discussion, big +100 from me :) > > > On 11/12/05, Alexander Hars <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > 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] > > > > >