Re: [aerogear-dev] Proposed Organization for our Site
> api.aerogear.org/<subproject>/ for API docs? how should we
differentiate from stable and dev? IMHO we need to have consistence across the projects,
but at the same time I'm out of ideas apart from
api.aerogear.org/aerogear-js/1.0.0.Alpha1/ (version component is the last, being
'current' or 'dev' the current versions)
I am also +1 for this organization. That way, we can keep all old docs live for those
using older version and use it as a way of informing user of no longer supporting versions
with messaging on the docs.
Do you really want to host every 'alpha', 'beta' etc online ?
For major releases I can see that, but IMO when alpha2 is released, I
am not sure if there is really need to host alpha1..
And we can use that same messaging to inform users that they are
looking at the dev version which is subject to change and shouldn't be used in
production.
>
I like the linking from the W3C, where they link to both 'published'
and 'dev' spec
-M
> thoughts?
>
> -- qmx
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> aerogear-dev mailing list
> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
_______________________________________________
aerogear-dev mailing list
aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
--
Matthias Wessendorf
blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf