commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Mark R. Diggory" <>
Subject Re: [common-build]
Date Sun, 21 Mar 2004 04:05:08 GMT

Stephen Colebourne wrote:
> All I have really done is to apply what I thought was the agreed standard to
> a number of projects. I did create the extra sandbox css file, but otherwise
> I've just been cutting and pasting.

And I think it all looks great, I think we all owe you a word of thanks 
for your efforts in cleaning this up.

> As I understood it, the jsl was needed so as to get stuff below the maven
> doc block on current maven versions. I thought the dtd was just part of
> that.

Yes, the commons-site.jsl also maintains the css L&F across the whole 
commons. I just actually think we can get away with even more global 
control of the navigation menus via some small modifications to the jsl. 
But, I also suspect some of this sort of automation can wait until we at 
least get a beta release of the current site up and running.

> Instead of describing technical detail, I'll describe the site. In an ideal
> world I want
> Commons Xxx
>   Overview
>   User guide/History/Best practices/...
>   Javadoc (latest release)
>   Download          (new page, links to download choices)
> Development
>   Mailing lists           (from maven)
>   Team                    (from maven)
>   Developers guide   (code standards)
>   Project status        (formal proposal and status file)
>   Tasks                  (todo list)
>   CVS
>   Javadoc (CVS latest)
> Project documentation  (maven)
> [Other commons documentation]
> [Components menu]
> [Sandbox menu]
> [Related]
> Of course the top section layout is project dependent, but it would be nice
> to have some familiarity between projects if possible.

yep, I think we are settled on the design in this area. So what are your 
sentimate on the overall toplevel site generation. Do you feel its 
adequate to replace the existing contents at this time?


> From: "Mark R. Diggory" <>
> To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" <>
> Sent: Saturday, March 20, 2004 8:17 PM
> Subject: Re: [common-build]
>>Yes, thats what I meant by the second item on the list. It was unclear
>>to me if we had achieved consistency across all the sub-project
>>navigation.xml docs at this point.
>>Some thoughts:
>>a.) Approach I was advocating was to use commons-site.jsl to control
>>navigation creation and ordering so that includes did not need to be
>>present in individual projects.
>>b.) approach I believe your working on uses dtd includes directly into
>>navigation.xmls of subprojects.
>>c.) Currently we have a hybrid of these two approaches, 1.) Includes
>>into each navigation.xml 2.) enforcement on ordering in commons-site.jsl
>>Is this what we want? Can it be made more transparent to the
>>sub-projects by not using includes at that level?
>>[X] stable top level navigation.
>>[ ] agreed includes in all subproject sites (single include strategy).
>>[ ] backup of current toplevel site.
>>[ ] fresh rebuild and publish of mavenized top-level site (under
>>[ ] fresh rebuild and publish of all sub-project sites.
>>Stephen Colebourne wrote:
>>>Looks good, although I thought that we now had a single include strategy
> for
>>>----- Original Message -----
>>>From: "Mark R. Diggory" <>
>>>>Whats our current status on the the top level site? I think its obvious
>>>>that we have at reached a LCD (least common denominator) on the
>>>>navigation for the time being. So I'm going to break down things into a
>>>>list of steps to get through for migration of the "commons" toplevel to
>>>>the mavenized site.
>>>>[X] stable top level navigation.
>>>>[ ] agreed includes in all subproject sites.
>>>>[ ] backup of current toplevel site.
>>>>[ ] fresh rebuild and publish of mavenized top-level site.
>>>>[ ] fresh rebuild and publish of all sub-project sites.
>>>>I think its important to get the top-level site in place fist before
>>>>verifying all the lower level sites are correctly rendered, this is
>>>>because all links currently lead back to
>>>> and it difficult to do things like
>>>>link checking because the old site always ends up in the navigation
>>>>On that note, do we have any solid "linkchecking" tools available to
>>>>verify the integrity of the site?

Mark Diggory
Software Developer
Harvard MIT Data Center

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message