Regardless of which wiki we use the documentation is in Forrest and checked into SVN. Forrest is used both to write the docs (which are versioned along with the code) as well as generating the hadoop.apache.org web site. (trunk/src/docs) We have a tech writer who is currently migrating the sourceforge documentation to forrest.

The wiki will be used to capture information which is specifically not documentation; faq, policies, procedures, etc...


Patrick

Doug Cutting wrote:
James Strachan wrote:
Tools like wikis are personal things; and folks tend to prefer to use
the tool they know.

That's a key point.

To make a switch you'd need:
1. Someone familiar with Confluence to lead the transition, convert the existing website and wiki content, set up static export etc. Are you volunteering? 2. Buy in from Zookeeper's primary contributors, who will end up writing and maintaining the documentation (Pat, Ben, etc.). I don't really count, since I'm mostly a kibitzer here.

Also, with Confluence export, how does one deal with versioning? A convenience of keeping documentation in subversion is that it gets versioned with releases. By maintaining the trunk documentation to match the trunk implementation, we automatically get documentation that matches each version, but we can still maintain the documentation in release branches. I don't see how this would not add overhead with Confluence exports. If Confluence always represented trunk, and we exported at release branch points, then it would be hard to patch branched documentation. Maintaining multiple branches in Confluence would add management overhead, since these would need to be synchronized with subversion branching, tagging, etc. How have other projects dealt with this issue?

Doug

Reply via email to