commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stephen Colebourne <>
Subject Re: [site] No commons build
Date Thu, 16 Mar 2006 23:11:57 GMT
Niall Pemberton wrote:
 > Another problem is the new "commons" menus doesn't work with distros
 > that include their site with the docs - I just checked commons logging
 > and none of the commons entries work - it needs to be changed to
 > absolute urls, rather than relative.
I chose relative URLs deliberatley to avoid the external links in the 
commons menu section. However, you are correct and these have to be 

I have adjusted the project.css to remove the external link image from 
all links in the commons menu div to get around this change.

Niall Pemberton wrote:
> I have implemented an alternative approach in Validator that uses an
> svn:external to pull in the commons-build.
> I set up a new "shared-build" directory in commons-build and created
> an svn:external to pull in that directory. Anything that gets dropped
> in "shared-build" will be automatically pulled into Validator  (or any
> other component that uses it) via the svn:external.
> This has the benefit of removing commons-build, but not introducing
> the requirement to be online to build or view the docs properly.

This fails in three ways for me:
1) Eclispe doesn't pick up the svn:external and use it. Thus validator 
won't site build from an svn checkout in the most popular IDE.

2) The dtd is still referenced by a relative path. This causes maven 
issues and thus complicates our lives.

3) This setup requires a rebuild for every ApacheCon type event. As can 
be seen from the number of commons sites which still reference ApacheCon 
2005, this mechanism just doesn't scale/work. Referencing a single 
central css file handles this scenario.

Niall Pemberton wrote:
 > The problem with this approach [online files] is that as well
 > as requiring an online
 > connection to build components, it also requires a online connection
 > to view the docs properly. <snip>
What proportion of people view the site offline? Its got to be fairly 
small. And the only thing they'll see is that the site style changes a 
little. IMHO thats not a big deal.

What proportion of people need to build the site offline? A tiny number. 
Is it worth the extra hassle to deal with it? (And in fact all they have 
to do is to remove the dtd and entity references from navigation .xml)


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

View raw message