htdocs structure

[David Reid <dr...@jetnet.co.uk>]

I know this probably isn't the right time, but then I don't really know when
the correct time would be, so using this logic this is as good a time as
any.

The documentation that we include in the server distribution is not bad in
some areas, strong in others but it's not very well organized.  To try and
improve it and with the background of all the changes we're making I'm
suggesting that we split the focus into "Developer" and "Administrator"
trees.  The relative content should be self explanatory :-)

If we make the change now then at least we can start actually moving some of
the 1.3 docco over and making it relevant to 2.0.  I know we don't expect
any form of release for a long time and there will be the usual argument
that the code is still altering but if we're honest there is a lot of code
that's been converted and not touched since.

I'm not advocating that we need to start a big documentation drive but there
are people who can contribute a few things to make peoples lives easier when
looking at the 2.0 codebase for the first time, and I suppose we're going to
be expecting a few of those when we go to beta?  Might be nice if we had at
least some of the basics there to smooth their way.  Again, these will be
people who some so we don't need chapter and verse just pointers and
explanations of what we've screwed up (or rewritten).

Another 2p worth...

david

Re: htdocs structure

[Dean Gaudet <dg...@arctic.org>]

sounds good... there's an "apache-docs" mailing list too i think, not sure
how active it is these days.

Dean

On Wed, 29 Dec 1999, David Reid wrote:

> I know this probably isn't the right time, but then I don't really know when
> the correct time would be, so using this logic this is as good a time as
> any.
> 
> The documentation that we include in the server distribution is not bad in
> some areas, strong in others but it's not very well organized.  To try and
> improve it and with the background of all the changes we're making I'm
> suggesting that we split the focus into "Developer" and "Administrator"
> trees.  The relative content should be self explanatory :-)
> 
> If we make the change now then at least we can start actually moving some of
> the 1.3 docco over and making it relevant to 2.0.  I know we don't expect
> any form of release for a long time and there will be the usual argument
> that the code is still altering but if we're honest there is a lot of code
> that's been converted and not touched since.
> 
> I'm not advocating that we need to start a big documentation drive but there
> are people who can contribute a few things to make peoples lives easier when
> looking at the 2.0 codebase for the first time, and I suppose we're going to
> be expecting a few of those when we go to beta?  Might be nice if we had at
> least some of the basics there to smooth their way.  Again, these will be
> people who some so we don't need chapter and verse just pointers and
> explanations of what we've screwed up (or rewritten).
> 
> Another 2p worth...
> 
> david
> 
>