On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 6:50 AM, Clay Leeds
<the.webmaestro@...> wrote:
On Apr 8, 2012, at 7:21 PM, Glenn Adams <glenn@...> wrote:
Yes, we'd lose the XML-based nature of the documentation. That's a fairly large loss, but I don't know if that's a showstopper, considering the benefits of having CMS-based documentation.
What prevents you from using the existing xdoc format as source, then using an XSLT to map to MD whence it can be imported into / processed by the CMS. Or can you incorporate this translation process into the CMS?
Nothing prevents, but the goal is in this exercise is to minimize launch preparation time. ;-)
If we continue to use xdoc, the CMS is skipped. It's certainly possible, but...
My main issue is switching our source format for FOP docs from XML to MD. I'm not comfortable with making this change. However, if my position is a minority among FOP committers, I will defer to the majority.
Again, I don't particularly see a problem that needs to be solved with switching to CMS. True, publishing FOP site docs is presently a little clunky, but I was able to figure it out (from scratch) in a few hours, and can reproduce it at will. Of course, if
people.apache.org is really going away in 2012, then I agree something has to be done.
If you have cycles to spend on FOP documentation, I would prefer you spend it on updating the site and wiki docs, which are, in many cases, quite out of date. However, how you use your time is your call. :)
Regards,
G.
