I think a wiki is a decent option, but another option would be to make a
/trunk/tapestry-ioc/
...
/trunk/tapestry-site/
...
project which could be versioned (or at least released) on a different
cycle. This could keep (for any branch such as 5.0, 5.1) the docs as
fresh as you wanted to release them.
A second, orthogonal pattern is to generate site-documentation on a
nightly build and put it up at a standard location, so anyone can
check the nightly site docs. This could be matched by a nightly
snapshot so the code matches the docs, for things like javadocs and
component reports.
Christian.
On 29-Apr-09, at 19:02 , Howard Lewis Ship wrote:
One of the issues with T5 documentation is that it is written in Maven
APT format. This is better than HTML or even various XML docbook-lite
kind of things, but it ties documentation down to the Tapestry release
cycle.
Perhaps it would be better if all documentation was moved onto a live
wiki. This has the advantage that more people can work on it, beyond
just the T5 committers.
I don't think Tapestry's wiki, http://wiki.apache.org/tapestry, is up
to the task.
I've set up Confluence at Tapestry360:
http://tapestry.formos.com/wiki/dashboard.action
This is a more industrial strength wiki, better organized, good
WYSIWYG editor, good support for images and attachments, and tons of
features I don't know or understand yet.
The downside of this is that it will be harder to correlate
documentation against releases. We've seen this before, when I might
publish on the list of the nightly docs some new features, and then a
raft of errors about it not working come in.
Also, I haven't had the bandwidth to validate the many notes and
how-tos on the current Wiki. I'm not sure I would personally be able
to do better on Confluence.
On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 3:31 PM, manuel aldana <ald...@gmx.de> wrote:
Inge Solvoll schrieb:
1. What, politically, made it hard to introduce T5 in your
organisation?
Who
resisted, and why?
I am sure there a two things which could help at promotion for
convincing
decision makers: Real big live sites running under tapestry and a
good up to
date book.
2. What, technically, made it hard to introduce/teach T5 among your
programmer colleagues? (some already mentioned documentation)
As bigger sites hardly start from scratch, I see the legacy reason
as a big
technical point. Usually big codebases rely on action/command focused
frameworks (e.g. struts, spring mvc) and it is extremely hard to
refactor
them to page and component based ones. Also I see that frontend
people are
being used to work with JSP, freemarker etc. and are a bit
hesitating to
look at "yet another" templating technology.
I really like tapestry concepts and helps a lot to think in different
directions even if you don't use it in daily job. About tap-ioc I
really
like to java-code style injection and configuration instead for XML.
- manuel aldana
ald...@gmx.de
software-engineering blog: http://www.aldana-online.de
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org
--
Howard M. Lewis Ship
Creator of Apache Tapestry
Director of Open Source Technology at Formos
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org
Christian Edward Gruber
e-mail: christianedwardgru...@gmail.com
weblog: http://www.geekinasuit.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org
