aries-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Bosschaert <david.bosscha...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Aries website outdated pages
Date Wed, 05 Jun 2013 10:10:41 GMT
I've made the changes as agreed. I didn't touch the release pages. Removed
the javadoc, release notes pages and pointer to inactive Aries blog.
I've also updated the 'programming model' page to be a more comprehensive
(but high-level) list of technologies available in Aries:
http://aries.apache.org/documentation/ariesprogrammingmodel.html

Anyone: feel free to make additional changes...

Cheers,

David

On 4 June 2013 13:53, Jeremy Hughes <jpjhughes@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi David,
>
> I made some comments and votes largely in line with what's been
> discussed...
>
> On 4 June 2013 12:24, David Bosschaert <david.bosschaert@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 28 May 2013 14:43, Daniel Kulp <dkulp@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> On May 27, 2013, at 10:18 AM, David Bosschaert <
> david.bosschaert@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> > Downloads
> >> > * This page was last updated for the 1.0.0 release train and I wonder
> >> > whether we need it. All this info is available in Maven Central, can
> we
> >> not
> >> > simply remove it?
> >> > * Release notes. Since we are now supporting modular releases, do
> central
> >> > release notes make sense? I would simply remove this page.
> >> > * Archived releases - again, can we simply leverage Maven central for
> >> this?
> >>
> >> No for 1 and 3.  Per Apache policy, the releases must be downloadable
> from
> >> the Apache mirror network and old releases available from
> >> archive.apache.org/dist.
> >>
> >>
> > I didn't hear any objections to the other suggestions I made. If nobody
> > shouts soon I'll make the changes I outlined in my original email (pasted
> > below for reference) with the exception of the items pointed out by Dan
> > above.
> >
> > Again - we can always add any of these pages back later if we want. I
> just
> > want to get rid of as much stuff that is blatantly out of date...
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > David
> >
> > ----
> > Original mail:
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I had a quick browse through the Aries website and noticed that there are
> > quite a number of outdated pages. In some cases it was easy to update the
> > pages to more recent info (e.g. for the latest OSGi specs) but in other
> > cases I would propose the simply remove the outdated information. If
> > someone has the time to provide a replacement this can then be done
> later.
> >
> > Here's what I found:
> >
> > Documentation
> > * Programming Model: The Application model has since been superseded by
> the
> > standardised Subsystems. Proposal: remove Application bullets.
>
> +0. Would be good to keep it there but in a 'superceded' section.
>
> > * Pointers to OSGi specs: I updated these to point to R5 (was 4.2).
>
> +1 to keeping this up to date.
>
> > * Javadoc: this incomplete lists of modules points at old versions
> (0.3). I
> > would propose to delete this page as this info is available in the
> > published javadoc maven artefacts.
>
> +1
>
> >
> > Downloads
> > * This page was last updated for the 1.0.0 release train and I wonder
> > whether we need it. All this info is available in Maven Central, can we
> not
> > simply remove it?
>
> -1 Like Dan says, our releases must be available from
> www.apache.org/dist and having a list of the releases is the best way
> of getting to them.
>
> > * Release notes. Since we are now supporting modular releases, do central
> > release notes make sense? I would simply remove this page.
>
> +1. Each release should get a set of release notes in JIRA. It would
> be nice to have this linked from the main downloads page.
>
> > * Archived releases - again, can we simply leverage Maven central for
> this?
>
> -1 Like Dan say.
>
> >
> > Community
> > * Aries group blog - hasn't been active since 2010. Should we remove this
> > link from the menu?
>
> +0
>
> >
> > I don't really have the time to completely polish up the website but I
> > would be happy to make the above changes to ensure that the obsolete info
> > is gone.
> >
> > Thoughts anyone?
> > Cheers,
> >
> > David
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message