xmlgraphics-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Pascal Sancho <psancho....@gmail.com>
Subject Re: documentation!???
Date Wed, 06 Feb 2013 15:43:21 GMT
Hi,

2013/2/6 Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>:
> On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 4:29 AM, Pascal Sancho <psancho.asf@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Since XCG website repository includes now all XCG sub-projects, there
>> should be a Jira entry for that.
>>
>
> By "include all" do you mean "includes all documentation for XCG
> sub-projects"?

Yes, this is a fact. The whole XCG CMS, with sub-projects parts, is
now in its own SVN project, outside XCG projects sources.

> I'm personally not comfortable with this arrangement, because it
> complicates releases and doesn't properly separate distinct project assets.

I'm not sure; the whole release process can be now divided into 2
distinct stages:
 1/ make the release (decide, build, push, test)
 2/ update website/doc and announce when release is ready

But I agree that doc should come with the product then added to website.
World is not perfect.

>> In the same way, the doc management page should be moved to XCG general
>> website; WDYT?
>>
>> 2013/2/5 Clay Leeds <the.webmaestro@gmail.com>
>>
>>> I'll investigate the ANT stuff.
>>>
>>> As for including the docs in the dist, I don't believe there's an option
>>> at present. I'll investigate that as well.
>>>
>>> Clay
>>>
>>>
>>> On Feb 5, 2013, at 1:56 PM, Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>  ok; how about the question about future releases? until now, batik,
>>> xgc-commons, and fop could be released with source artifacts that contained
>>> document sources; but now, it doesn't seem like that is possible, or at
>>> least the "dist-src" build targets do not go out to collect the new
>>> documentation sources and copy them into the generated source artifact;
>>>
>>> while you are at it, the old "publish.xml" ant files seem to be obsolete
>>> as well; are there any other ant updates needed to rid us of obsolete doc
>>> work flow?
>>>
>>> On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 2:17 PM, Clay Leeds <the.webmaestro@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Glenn,
>>>>
>>>> The documentation exists solely in the ASF CMS, and so
>>>> fop/src/documentation is obsolete. We purposely did not delete the
>>>> src/documentation path until we were completely sure we weren't going back.
>>>> I suppose we're thereā€¦
>>>>
>>>> I'm happy to nuke ye olde documentation Forrest-based 'xdoc' directories.
>>>>
>>>> After I do that, I'll update the Document Management page with updated
>>>> instructions:
>>>>
>>>> http://xmlgraphics.apache.org/fop/dev/doc.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Feb 5, 2013, at 9:44 AM, Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> where do we edit documentation now? is fop/src/documentation now
>>>> obsolete? if so, then why is it still in the tree? how will we do releases
>>>> and still include documentation if it lives in another tree?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> pascal



-- 
pascal

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xmlgraphics.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xmlgraphics.apache.org


Mime
View raw message