db-torque-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Thomas Fox <Thomas....@seitenbau.net>
Subject Re: Planning
Date Tue, 09 Oct 2012 09:25:09 GMT
Thomas Vandahl wrote:
> On 03.10.12 03:21, Thomas Fox wrote:
> > 2) I do not see the necessity to have a source distribution for single
> > modules. We already have a source distribution for all modules. Having
> > single source distributions has the problem that the module builds
depend
> > on each other.
>
> I already expressed my opinion that this is a bit uncommon. It would at
> least not meet my expectations.

I'm not totally opposed to it, it just makes the build more complicated and
is work to implement. If you find it is necessary, please feel free to go
ahead and implement it.

> > 3) We can use db/torque/site-svnpubsub as svn location. There, a
directory
> > should exist for every documentation version we want to retain (even
the
> > newest version), e.g db/torque/site-svnpubsub/torque-4.0. There should
be a
> > single index.html file in the db/torque/site-svnpubsub location, which
> > redirects to the current version.
>
> I just noticed that a Maven plugin has been released to handle this. See
> here: http://maven.apache.org/sandbox/plugins/maven-scm-publish-plugin/
> We should check if the plugin meets the requirements.

Thanks for the heads-up, I'll try to use it.

> Concerning the maintenance of old docs: I'd drop this for 3.1 and 3.2,
> only keeping 3.3.

ok, fine with me.
So the first step would be to recreate the 3.3 docs without the reference
to the 3.2 and 3.1 docs and check them in
For the 4.0 docs, I'm going to try and check them in using the
maven-scm-publish-plugin (already without the cobertura reports, saves 70M
disk space).
After this has happend, we'll review the checked-in site and then ask intra
to set up svnpubsub.
Any objections ?

> ...
> > 6) In my opinion, the user sees Torque as a single toolkit. Why should
he
> > bother to first think into which module he must look into for
> > documentation? While at this, I'd also like to move the docs to a more
> > prominent place than Module Documentation/Modules/${module}/Reference
in
> > the current site menu structure
>
> I believe that most people only get in touch with the maven-plugin and
> the runtime. Fiddling with the generator and the templates is advanced
> stuff, IMO. (Do we have some numbers to prove this?) I guess a more
> prominent place for the docs could do no harm. I'd concentrate on the
> most-used parts, however.

Yes, that would be the main feature to consider.

> PS: Do we meet in Sinsheim?

I'm afraid not. Lots to do with my two small kids...


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: torque-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: torque-dev-help@db.apache.org


Mime
View raw message