better docs

[Lukas Kahwe Smith <ml...@pooteeweet.org>]

Aloha,

As I assume by now many are aware there is a port of the JCR interfaces to PHP called PHPCR [1] and there is an implementation that uses Jackrabbit via Davex [2]. We also have a non Java implementation [3] but for more large scale deployments and for those needing a full implementation of the spec we suggest to use Jackrabbit. Getting PHP developers to setup a Java solution is still fairly hard, despite many using Solr/ElasticSearch nowadays, but the lack of good setup documentation and the fairly messy wiki don't help.

As a first step a PHPCR contributor put together some deployment docs for using Jackrabbit inside Tomcat with MySQL on our wiki (mainly because he doesnt have write access to the Jackrabbit wiki .. we are happy to move it over):
https://github.com/jackalope/jackalope/wiki/Running-jackrabbit-in-tomcat-with-mysql

But more generally I wonder if there are any plans to improve this situation. I have noticed that some of the projects using Jackrabbit have some good information as part of their docs. But its unfortunate that resources arent pooled here to provide a single coherent and up to date resource for documentation. And I think a wiki is actually not the right format for this.

regards,
Lukas

Re: better docs

[David Buchmann <da...@liip.ch>]

hi,

i think the question lukas is asking goes further than just the concrete
example of running it stand-alone. if you want to use the API, for
example to write a SQL2 query or build a content type definition with
the jcr type manager you are pretty much on your own. you can try to
read the spec, but a spec is not the ideal thing to learn how to do
common use cases.

i think the questions are:

* can we make hyppo, magnolia and others contribute documentation on
core jcr features that they have in their projects?
* what would be the right format and place to put the documentation? i
agree with lukas that the wiki is not ideal. it does not give the
information enough structure if you want to learn things. a good example
imho is the symfony documentation [1]
* who would help to assemble a useful documentation and write missing
parts? the wiki contains some really outdated information and would need
to be cleaned up.


cheers,david

[1] http://symfony.com/doc/current/book/index.html

Am 19.09.2012 11:36, schrieb Lukas Kahwe Smith:
> 
> On Sep 17, 2012, at 2:40 PM, Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 5:10 PM, Lukas Kahwe Smith <ml...@pooteeweet.org> wrote:
>>> But more generally I wonder if there are any plans to improve this situation.
>>
>> Not that I know of, unfortunately.
>>
>> AFAICT most people using Jackrabbit do so in embedded mode, either
>> directly or through Sling, and thus there hasn't been much interest in
>> (or contributions to) the standalone server or other non-embedded
>> deployment scenarios. An since most of the embedded deployment
>> scenarios are highly dependent on the host application, the scope for
>> shared documentation has been rather narrow.
> 
> Yeah, but even then lots of things remain the same regardless of the "host app and regardless if its embedded or not. This applies to configuration but even more so to such stuff as SQL2 syntax etc.
> 
>> Of course there's no reason why that should be the case also in the
>> future, and I'd be eager to support any good proposals for improving
>> the level of shared documentation.
> 
> 
> maybe HippoCMS and Magnolia people can chime in here?
> 
> regards,
> Lukas Kahwe Smith
> mls@pooteeweet.org
> 
> 
> 

-- 
Liip AG // Agile Web Development // T +41 26 422 25 11
CH-1700 Fribourg // PGP 0xA581808B // www.liip.ch

Re: better docs

[Lukas Kahwe Smith <ml...@pooteeweet.org>]

On Sep 17, 2012, at 2:40 PM, Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 5:10 PM, Lukas Kahwe Smith <ml...@pooteeweet.org> wrote:
>> But more generally I wonder if there are any plans to improve this situation.
> 
> Not that I know of, unfortunately.
> 
> AFAICT most people using Jackrabbit do so in embedded mode, either
> directly or through Sling, and thus there hasn't been much interest in
> (or contributions to) the standalone server or other non-embedded
> deployment scenarios. An since most of the embedded deployment
> scenarios are highly dependent on the host application, the scope for
> shared documentation has been rather narrow.

Yeah, but even then lots of things remain the same regardless of the "host app and regardless if its embedded or not. This applies to configuration but even more so to such stuff as SQL2 syntax etc.

> Of course there's no reason why that should be the case also in the
> future, and I'd be eager to support any good proposals for improving
> the level of shared documentation.


maybe HippoCMS and Magnolia people can chime in here?

regards,
Lukas Kahwe Smith
mls@pooteeweet.org

Re: better docs

[Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>]

Hi,

On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 5:10 PM, Lukas Kahwe Smith <ml...@pooteeweet.org> wrote:
> But more generally I wonder if there are any plans to improve this situation.

Not that I know of, unfortunately.

AFAICT most people using Jackrabbit do so in embedded mode, either
directly or through Sling, and thus there hasn't been much interest in
(or contributions to) the standalone server or other non-embedded
deployment scenarios. An since most of the embedded deployment
scenarios are highly dependent on the host application, the scope for
shared documentation has been rather narrow.

Of course there's no reason why that should be the case also in the
future, and I'd be eager to support any good proposals for improving
the level of shared documentation.

BR,

Jukka Zitting