Re: hosting packages on external VCS sites

On Sun, 18 Mar 2007 15:09:58 -0500, Gregory Beaver wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> I am dismayed to see that a few of our packages that
have external
> hosting of revision control now come up as 404, and
some with external
> documentation come up as 404.
> 
> What do you think?
> 
> Greg

Well I totally agree, maybe not the domain name because as
someone 
pointed out, they can lapse.

Actually this issue has been discussed before, the RCS issue
that is, 
both here on the list (~ 1 year ago) and I posted some
thoughts of my own 
about this on my blog but it's currently down, I'm waiting
for Pierre to 
come back to live so he can install the system I sent him
then I'll post 
the link to the blog post, it's a somewhat excerpt of the
discussion that 
we had here.

The bottom line is, either use cvs.php.net or a public
service or be an 
established project like Horde, pat, etc that actually could
pull off 
hosting their code them self.

About the doc issue, I'm all about keeping it all on
pearweb, docbook 
would be best but then someone would have to step up and
make peardoc not 
use some utterly odd format of docbook and be more in pair
with the php 
manual, the most important reason for this is to being able
to use the 
nifty revision tool they have over at the phpdoc team,
something you 
can't really get on wikis when we are dealing with multi
language docs 
unless we maintain revision numbers by hand and make our own
little 
scripts to travers the db to show who is out of date with
the English 
version, how far behind, what's missing and such.

Regards
Helgi

-- 
PEAR Development Mailing List (http://pear.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub
.php

See inline..

On 3/23/07, Helgi Þormar Þorbjörnsson <dufuzphp.net> wrote:
> On Sun, 18 Mar 2007 15:09:58 -0500, Gregory Beaver
wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I am dismayed to see that a few of our packages
that have external
> > hosting of revision control now come up as 404,
and some with external
> > documentation come up as 404.
> >
> > What do you think?
> >
> > Greg
>
> Well I totally agree, maybe not the domain name because
as someone
> pointed out, they can lapse.
>
> Actually this issue has been discussed before, the RCS
issue that is,
> both here on the list (~ 1 year ago) and I posted some
thoughts of my own
> about this on my blog but it's currently down, I'm
waiting for Pierre to
> come back to live so he can install the system I sent
him then I'll post
> the link to the blog post, it's a somewhat excerpt of
the discussion that
> we had here.
>
> The bottom line is, either use cvs.php.net or a public
service or be an
> established project like Horde, pat, etc that actually
could pull off
> hosting their code them self.
>
> About the doc issue, I'm all about keeping it all on
pearweb, docbook
> would be best but then someone would have to step up
and make peardoc not
> use some utterly odd format of docbook and be more in
pair with the php
> manual, the most important reason for this is to being
able to use the
> nifty revision tool they have over at the phpdoc team,
something you
> can't really get on wikis when we are dealing with
multi language docs
> unless we maintain revision numbers by hand and make
our own little
> scripts to travers the db to show who is out of date
with the English
> version, how far behind, what's missing and such.
>

The choice of using docbook might be hard to some people to
understand
as this is a relatively new (~~ new is a big word)
structure/language
for many people. However, this is a documentation standard
and we can
state also projects using it as such as the Zend Framework.

Also,  concerning using svn or cvs, this is also something
we have
discussed for the past what.. year or so ? we even had a
page and I
encourage you all to put your thoughts/facts there:
http://oss.backen
dmedia.com/PHPSVN/

Moreover, in order to have a good wiki, a project needs a
wikimaster.
But this is currently being discussed and as soon as the
pear group is
elected we will come to a conclusion on the documentation
tools, etc.
This is personally my top priority if I am elected :P

We are currently discussing about:
-----------------------------------------------
Bug reporters;
Wikis;
Forums;
etc.

There is a lot of things that are going to be improved in
pear within
the next few months and I hope to see you all participate in
all that
.

The goal we are trying to achieve is to first, make the task
of
writing docs, not a problem but something that can be done
without
pain and too many problems. We have to get the idea that
writing docs
is painful (even though it is in any language possible most
of the
times) because it is extremely useful.

more ? yes..
I can't agree with you Markus when you say that writing
docbook for
one package is overhead, I mean look at this page:

http://cvs.php.net/viewvc.cgi/peardoc/en/package/text/


Look at text-captcha-numeral.xml and the folder. This has
three pages
and it is not extremely complicated to use and code.

What I really like about docbook is not it's simplicity but
actually
is complecity, I mean book companies use this for some
developers
(like latex), frameworks use it, other random non-computer
projects
use it. This is a worldwide documentation language and this
is the
reason why it was built. It might take one or more hours to
understand
it, but learning it to a certain degree that you can write
at least
simple docs is rather easy.


> Regards
> Helgi
>
> --
> PEAR Development Mailing List (http://pear.php.net/)
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub
.php
>
>


-- 
David Coallier,
Founder & Software Architect,
Agora Production (http://agoraproduction.com
)
51.42.06.70.18

--
PEAR Development Mailing List (http://pear.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub
.php