The docs for 4.2 are not settled yet and may take another couple of days. David
are you considering the change for 4.2?
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Daan Hoogland [mailto:daan.hoogl...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 07, 2013 12:11 AM
> To: dev
> Subject: Re: Breaking docs out
>
> ok,
>
> +0 then, I'm off for a coffee.
>
> On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 10:21 PM, Jessica Tomechak
> <jessica.tomec...@citrix.com> wrote:
> > I'm +0 on it. Don't really mind either way.
> >
> > Jessica T.
> > ________________________________________
> > From: Radhika Puthiyetath [radhika.puthiyet...@citrix.com]
> > Sent: Monday, August 05, 2013 9:25 PM
> > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> > Subject: RE: Breaking docs out
> >
> > Make perfect sense.
> > + 1
> >
> > -Radhika
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: David Nalley [mailto:da...@gnsa.us]
> > Sent: Tuesday, August 06, 2013 3:13 AM
> > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> > Subject: Breaking docs out
> >
> > Hi folks:
> >
> > I'd like to propose breaking out a nuymber of our documents into their
> own repos.
> >
> > My thinking is that specifically; the release notes, midonet, and
> niciranvp documentation shares very little with the rest of the
> documentation, and should be broken out akin to how the QIG is currently
> broken out.
> >
> > The particular problem I am trying to solve is to deal with
> publishing. For instance, even though the release notes are contained in
> just a few xml documents, it copies content from every single xml file
> in thd directory - over 400 - and it also copies those up to the
> website.
> >
> > Splitting things up also allows us to prioritize l10n. Right now, we
> just dump 400 xml files worth of content into transifex and people
> translate away - they can't put a priority on release notes, or de-
> emphasize more esoteric documentation like Nicira or Midonet.
> >
> > Eventually I'd like to break out each of the individual guides into
> their own document - separate from the other. Right now they carry a ton
> of similar content so that isn't very practical; but it's what I am
> thinking, perhaps for 4.4 or 4.5.
> >
> > In the meantime, I'd like to make this change as soon as we think we
> have documentation pretty close to done for 4.2 to minimize the
> disruptive effects.
> >
> > Thoughts, comments, flames?
> >
> > --David
