[kepler-dev] breaking off a kepler-docs repository

[Shawn Bowers]

I think it is a good idea to *not* include the various publications and 
presentations concerning Kepler in the code repository (cvs).

I wonder, however, if having a separate cvs for documents is the way to 
go.  Instead, maybe we should consider using a more traditional approach 
like a document management system? I'm sure there are a number of 
open-source/free ones out there (e.g., zope and plone are popular ones, 
the stanford publication server is an older one).  Perhaps there are 
also extensions of the wiki for this?


-shawn




Chad Berkley wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> As I sit here checking out kepler (again), waiting forever for the docs 
> directory to finish, it occured to me that it might be ok to have a 
> different cvs repository for kepler docs.  there's no reason why a 
> developer should have to checkout out a myriad of .doc and .ppt files 
> everytime you need a new version of kepler.  It seems to me that docs 
> that actually go with the kepler software should stay in the kepler 
> repository, but publications, reports and the like could be stashed 
> somewhere else.  Anyone have any reasons why this would be a bad idea?
> 
> thanks,
> chad
> _______________________________________________
> Kepler-dev mailing list
> Kepler-dev at ecoinformatics.org
> http://mercury.nceas.ucsb.edu/ecoinformatics/mailman/listinfo/kepler-dev