Mailing-List: contact cocoon-docs-help@xml.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: cocoon-docs@xml.apache.org
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2003 09:36:09 +0100 (CET)
From: Stephan Michels <stephan@apache.org>
To: cocoon-docs@xml.apache.org
Subject: Re: Migration to Forrest
In-Reply-To: <3ADE17AD-5B69-11D7-9C46-000393CFE402@codeconsult.ch>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0303210929040.21909-100000@vern.chem.tu-berlin.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=iso8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE


On Fri, 21 Mar 2003, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:

> Le Vendredi, 21 mars 2003, =E0 04:16 Europe/Zurich, Jeff Turner a =E9crit=
 :
>
> > ...IMHO the ideal solution would be for Cocoon to build its own
> > documentation, using the Forrest DTDs and a skin checked into Cocoon
> > CVS....
>
> Ok - I agree with the advantages you mention, makes sense and this is
> probably simpler than using Forrest in binary form as I was suggesting.
>
> If I got it right though, this will require some duplication of stuff
> between Cocoon and Forrest?
> What exactly, DTDs, skin files, anything else?
> Can this stuff be *moved* into Cocoon instead of being duplicated?

Duplicate files produce always dependencies, which are poorly to
maintain :-/

I will be lucky, if we can throw out all of the documentation generating
stuff, so that Cocoon loose some of his 'fatness' ;-) SoC etc.

How is the status of the Forrest binary version? Is there anything I
can work with?


Stephan.