You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@cocoon.apache.org by Reinhard Poetz <re...@apache.org> on 2003/11/03 13:29:40 UTC
[VOTE] Remove IDL-Docs (was: Documenting the FOM)
I propose to remove the IDL-docs because they are far from being
up-to-date and the Flow-API is well-described in our usual docs.
Here my +1.
--
Reinhard
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Reinhard Poetz [mailto:reinhard@apache.org]
> Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 8:34 AM
> To: dev@cocoon.apache.org
> Subject: RE: Documenting the FOM
>
>
>
> From: Geoff Howard
>
> > Reinhard Poetz wrote:
> > > From: Giacomo Pati
> > >
> > >
> > >>Is the idl syntax still the way to describe the FOM documentation?
> > >
> > >
> > > AFAIK it is far from being up-to-date. Chris added the FOM
> > description
> > > to the Control Flow documentation. I think we can remove
> > the IDL docs.
> > >
> > > WDOT?
> >
> > I wouldn't object. At the very least the link off the main
> > welcome page
> > should not describe them as the "flow docs". They don't
> quite cut it
> > for the new user.
>
> Before deleting it we should disable them by default because
> their content is wrong. I'm not sure if I have time to do it
> today - if somebody else has time don't wait for me.
>
> Do we need a vote for deleting the IDL docs at all?
>
> Reinhard
>
Re: [VOTE] Remove IDL-Docs
Posted by Joerg Heinicke <jh...@virbus.de>.
On 03.11.2003 13:29, Reinhard Poetz wrote:
> I propose to remove the IDL-docs because they are far from being
> up-to-date and the Flow-API is well-described in our usual docs.
>
> Here my +1.
+1
Joerg
Re: [VOTE] Remove IDL-Docs
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
Le Lundi, 3 nov 2003, à 17:14 Europe/Zurich, Tony Collen a écrit :
>>> I propose to remove the IDL-docs because they are far from being
>>> up-to-date and the Flow-API is well-described in our usual docs.
+1
-Bertrand
Re: [VOTE] Remove IDL-Docs
Posted by Tony Collen <co...@umn.edu>.
Giacomo Pati wrote:
>
>
> Reinhard Poetz wrote:
>
>> I propose to remove the IDL-docs because they are far from being
>> up-to-date and the Flow-API is well-described in our usual docs.
>>
>> Here my +1.
>
>
> +1 for me.
>
+1 here, too
Tony
Re: [VOTE] Remove IDL-Docs
Posted by Giacomo Pati <gi...@apache.org>.
Reinhard Poetz wrote:
> I propose to remove the IDL-docs because they are far from being
> up-to-date and the Flow-API is well-described in our usual docs.
>
> Here my +1.
+1 for me.
--
Giacomo Pati
Otego AG, Switzerland - http://www.otego.com
Orixo, the XML business alliance - http://www.orixo.com
Re: [VOTE] Remove IDL-Docs
Posted by Geoff Howard <co...@leverageweb.com>.
Reinhard Poetz wrote:
>I propose to remove the IDL-docs because they are far from being
>up-to-date and the Flow-API is well-described in our usual docs.
>
>Here my +1.
>
>
+1
Geoff
[VOTE][Results] Remove IDL-Docs
Posted by Reinhard Poetz <re...@apache.org>.
Thank you for your votes guys:
There are 5 +1 votes. I'll remove it as soon as I have CVS access
(probably at the beginning of the next week -->
this unfortunatly also means that I can't take part at the Virtual
Hackaton
in a way which requires CVS commits. ... but I'll join discussions.).
--
Reinhard
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Reinhard Poetz [mailto:reinhard@apache.org]
> Sent: Monday, November 03, 2003 1:30 PM
> To: dev@cocoon.apache.org
> Subject: [VOTE] Remove IDL-Docs (was: Documenting the FOM)
>
>
>
> I propose to remove the IDL-docs because they are far from
> being up-to-date and the Flow-API is well-described in our usual docs.
>
> Here my +1.
>
> --
> Reinhard
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Reinhard Poetz [mailto:reinhard@apache.org]
> > Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 8:34 AM
> > To: dev@cocoon.apache.org
> > Subject: RE: Documenting the FOM
> >
> >
> >
> > From: Geoff Howard
> >
> > > Reinhard Poetz wrote:
> > > > From: Giacomo Pati
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >>Is the idl syntax still the way to describe the FOM
> documentation?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > AFAIK it is far from being up-to-date. Chris added the FOM
> > > description
> > > > to the Control Flow documentation. I think we can remove
> > > the IDL docs.
> > > >
> > > > WDOT?
> > >
> > > I wouldn't object. At the very least the link off the
> main welcome
> > > page should not describe them as the "flow docs". They don't
> > quite cut it
> > > for the new user.
> >
> > Before deleting it we should disable them by default because
> > their content is wrong. I'm not sure if I have time to do it
> > today - if somebody else has time don't wait for me.
> >
> > Do we need a vote for deleting the IDL docs at all?
> >
> > Reinhard
> >
>