Online Documentation

[Erik Hatcher <er...@earthlink.net>]

Struts documentation gets updated online from the latest codebase, correct?
I think it would be less confusing if the documentation online was for the
latest release build (like Ant's documentation for example), and
documentation for nightly or milestone builds is left in the downloadable
packages rather than being accessible from Struts website.

Is that a reasonable request?   What do others think?

Thanks,
    Erik

Re: Online Documentation

[Ted Husted <hu...@apache.org>]

"Craig R. McClanahan" wrote:
> Under any circumstances, it needs to be more clear that what the web site
> has on it -- I've asked Ted to think of presentation-oriented things we
> can do to make that clearer.

I will be working on that soon, and also adding an online FAQ to the
mix. Right now, I'm working against an August 31st project deadline, but
will be trying to bring the Website on a more sensible footing for
1.0/1.1 after than.

-Ted.

Re: Online Documentation

[Mark Takacs <ta...@coscend.com>]

Whups, sorry about the blank message. Using Mozilla 0.9.3 and still not 
used to the lack of "quote" button on the message layout ...

In short, I agree with the orginial poster.  I've caught myself looking 
at the online javadoc more than once and hoping that the 1.1-dev docs 
aren't too far from the 1.0 release version I'm using.


>Hmm ... I may be biased (being a Struts developer), but I would think the
>current approach makes more sense -- the *stable* docs are the ones in a
>release, and the web site can talk about "what's new and cool".
>

I suppose that depends on what sort of developer you envision using the 
online docs. As a developer who USES the stable struts code in my own 
applications, I'd like to see the "stable" 1.0 docs online at the 
official source.   When I need to look up a struts function, I turn to 
http://jakarta.apache.org/struts/api/ .   For some reason, I've never 
liked deploying javadoc locally for "utility" jarfiles.  It doesn't 
really make sense to consult remote javadoc , but all my javadoc 
bookmarks are like that.  *shrug*

As a developer who's WORKING ON the struts code, I'd naturally think to 
look at my own (local) javadoc to keep track of (and update) the 
javadoc, right next to the (local) javadoc for the application I'm 
developing..

-tak

Re: Online Documentation

[Ted Husted <hu...@apache.org>]

You can bring the Jakarta-wide issues up on the General list, but the
problem is that each subproject is responsible for their own work.
Apache doesn't like to meddle with decisions that the developers can
make for themselves. I'm sure that eventually a more consistent
consensus will arise, but right now, no one really has the authority to
tell each team of Committers which way they should go with something
like that.

Erik Hatcher wrote:
> 
> Craig,
> 
> I'm happy as long as things are consistent, and by that I mean across
> Jakarta completely, not just Struts.   Ant's online docs are for 1.3, but
> lots of folks are using the 1.4 beta releases with the documentation being
> in the downloaded packages.
> 
> Like the other poster, I consult the Struts website for documentation, but
> I'm running the latest release build.
> 
>     Erik

Re: Online Documentation

[Erik Hatcher <er...@earthlink.net>]

Craig,

I'm happy as long as things are consistent, and by that I mean across
Jakarta completely, not just Struts.   Ant's online docs are for 1.3, but
lots of folks are using the 1.4 beta releases with the documentation being
in the downloaded packages.

Like the other poster, I consult the Struts website for documentation, but
I'm running the latest release build.

    Erik


----- Original Message -----
From: "Craig R. McClanahan" <cr...@apache.org>
To: <st...@jakarta.apache.org>
Sent: Friday, August 24, 2001 2:41 PM
Subject: Re: Online Documentation


>
>
> On Fri, 24 Aug 2001, Erik Hatcher wrote:
>
> > Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2001 14:37:15 -0700
> > From: Erik Hatcher <er...@earthlink.net>
> > Reply-To: struts-dev@jakarta.apache.org
> > To: struts-dev@jakarta.apache.org
> > Subject: Online Documentation
> >
> > Struts documentation gets updated online from the latest codebase,
correct?
>
> On a sporadic basis, but yes.
>
> > I think it would be less confusing if the documentation online was for
the
> > latest release build (like Ant's documentation for example), and
> > documentation for nightly or milestone builds is left in the
downloadable
> > packages rather than being accessible from Struts website.
> >
>
> Hmm ... I may be biased (being a Struts developer), but I would think the
> current approach makes more sense -- the *stable* docs are the ones in a
> release, and the web site can talk about "what's new and cool".
>
> Under any circumstances, it needs to be more clear that what the web site
> has on it -- I've asked Ted to think of presentation-oriented things we
> can do to make that clearer.
>
> > Is that a reasonable request?   What do others think?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >     Erik
> >
> >
> >
>
> Craig
>
>

Re: Online Documentation

["Craig R. McClanahan" <cr...@apache.org>]

On Fri, 24 Aug 2001, Erik Hatcher wrote:

> Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2001 14:37:15 -0700
> From: Erik Hatcher <er...@earthlink.net>
> Reply-To: struts-dev@jakarta.apache.org
> To: struts-dev@jakarta.apache.org
> Subject: Online Documentation
>
> Struts documentation gets updated online from the latest codebase, correct?

On a sporadic basis, but yes.

> I think it would be less confusing if the documentation online was for the
> latest release build (like Ant's documentation for example), and
> documentation for nightly or milestone builds is left in the downloadable
> packages rather than being accessible from Struts website.
>

Hmm ... I may be biased (being a Struts developer), but I would think the
current approach makes more sense -- the *stable* docs are the ones in a
release, and the web site can talk about "what's new and cool".

Under any circumstances, it needs to be more clear that what the web site
has on it -- I've asked Ted to think of presentation-oriented things we
can do to make that clearer.

> Is that a reasonable request?   What do others think?
>
> Thanks,
>     Erik
>
>
>

Craig