You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@qpid.apache.org by Steve Huston <sh...@riverace.com> on 2010/04/30 17:02:41 UTC
New design doc - where to put it?
Hi Jonathan,
I am going to write up a new design doc for another store module for
Windows. Where is the best place for this in the new scheme of things? I
would ordinarily put it in the wiki (that is, if it worked ;-) but is
that still the best place for it?
Thanks,
-Steve
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
Project: http://qpid.apache.org
Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscribe@qpid.apache.org
Re: New design doc - where to put it?
Posted by Rajith Attapattu <ra...@gmail.com>.
However for now you could probably create a /design folder under the
/cpp/docs dir and check it in.
If that's not the right place then we could easily move it.
I think the most important thing is to get this going.
So I'd say check it in :)
Rajith
On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 11:34 AM, Rajith Attapattu <ra...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Good question Steve.
> I think we initially decided that at the least user facing docs should
> live in svn and then the rest in the wiki.
> But I think a strong case can be made for design docs in svn as well.
> I think it will force people to keep the design doc in sync with the code.
>
> Maybe we should try to get some consensus around where exactly to
> place these docs.
>
> Rajith
>
> On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 11:24 AM, Jonathan Robie
> <jo...@redhat.com> wrote:
>> On 04/30/2010 11:02 AM, Steve Huston wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Jonathan,
>>>
>>> I am going to write up a new design doc for another store module for
>>> Windows. Where is the best place for this in the new scheme of things? I
>>> would ordinarily put it in the wiki (that is, if it worked ;-) but is
>>> that still the best place for it?
>>>
>>
>> If the Wiki still worked (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-2671),
>> that would be a reasonable place to put it. I'd rather see design docs in
>> the source code tree, perhaps in the place where the new module is supposed
>> to live. That way, if I'm looking at the code, I also have the design
>> documentation that describes the code.
>>
>> For instance, perhaps we could agree that any time you have foo/src, foo/doc
>> is the right place to put design documentation that describes that source?
>> And in some directories where there is no ./src subdirectory, like
>> qpid/cpp/rubygen, we can just add ./doc as needed.
>>
>> We could describe that convention in a README at the top level.
>>
>> Does this sound good?
>>
>> Jonathan
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
>> Project: http://qpid.apache.org
>> Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscribe@qpid.apache.org
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Regards,
>
> Rajith Attapattu
> Red Hat
> http://rajith.2rlabs.com/
>
--
Regards,
Rajith Attapattu
Red Hat
http://rajith.2rlabs.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
Project: http://qpid.apache.org
Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscribe@qpid.apache.org
Re: New design doc - where to put it?
Posted by Rajith Attapattu <ra...@gmail.com>.
Good question Steve.
I think we initially decided that at the least user facing docs should
live in svn and then the rest in the wiki.
But I think a strong case can be made for design docs in svn as well.
I think it will force people to keep the design doc in sync with the code.
Maybe we should try to get some consensus around where exactly to
place these docs.
Rajith
On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 11:24 AM, Jonathan Robie
<jo...@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 04/30/2010 11:02 AM, Steve Huston wrote:
>>
>> Hi Jonathan,
>>
>> I am going to write up a new design doc for another store module for
>> Windows. Where is the best place for this in the new scheme of things? I
>> would ordinarily put it in the wiki (that is, if it worked ;-) but is
>> that still the best place for it?
>>
>
> If the Wiki still worked (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-2671),
> that would be a reasonable place to put it. I'd rather see design docs in
> the source code tree, perhaps in the place where the new module is supposed
> to live. That way, if I'm looking at the code, I also have the design
> documentation that describes the code.
>
> For instance, perhaps we could agree that any time you have foo/src, foo/doc
> is the right place to put design documentation that describes that source?
> And in some directories where there is no ./src subdirectory, like
> qpid/cpp/rubygen, we can just add ./doc as needed.
>
> We could describe that convention in a README at the top level.
>
> Does this sound good?
>
> Jonathan
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
> Project: http://qpid.apache.org
> Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscribe@qpid.apache.org
>
>
--
Regards,
Rajith Attapattu
Red Hat
http://rajith.2rlabs.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
Project: http://qpid.apache.org
Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscribe@qpid.apache.org
Re: New design doc - where to put it?
Posted by Jonathan Robie <jo...@redhat.com>.
On 04/30/2010 11:02 AM, Steve Huston wrote:
> Hi Jonathan,
>
> I am going to write up a new design doc for another store module for
> Windows. Where is the best place for this in the new scheme of things? I
> would ordinarily put it in the wiki (that is, if it worked ;-) but is
> that still the best place for it?
>
If the Wiki still worked
(https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-2671), that would be a
reasonable place to put it. I'd rather see design docs in the source
code tree, perhaps in the place where the new module is supposed to
live. That way, if I'm looking at the code, I also have the design
documentation that describes the code.
For instance, perhaps we could agree that any time you have foo/src,
foo/doc is the right place to put design documentation that describes
that source? And in some directories where there is no ./src
subdirectory, like qpid/cpp/rubygen, we can just add ./doc as needed.
We could describe that convention in a README at the top level.
Does this sound good?
Jonathan
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
Project: http://qpid.apache.org
Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscribe@qpid.apache.org