xmlgraphics-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Pascal Sancho <psancho....@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Getting XML Graphics Documentation into the SOURCE & BINARY Releases
Date Thu, 06 Jun 2013 07:06:31 GMT
Hi Clay,

you are right,
for TRUNK, there is no need to set a specific peg revision. That should be
done for TAGs.
Note that with tools like Tortoise SVN (win only) the interface gives
options to directly set peg revs.



2013/6/6 Clay Leeds <the.webmaestro@gmail.com>

> Hi folks,
>
> I hope you're well!
>
> I've been investigating how to get our documentation into our Source &
> Binary RELEASEs without requiring the duplicate work of trying to maintain
> two sets of documentation. I noticed the 'advertisement' from Infra@plugging their willingness
to help projects, and so I reached out, and they
> recommended `svn:externals`.
>
> Before I proceed, I'd like to get your input on how we should proceed, or
> if anyone has a 'better' idea. I'm leaning toward including the source
> MarkDown in the distribution via `svn:externals`, perhaps with a README
> file pointing at the web for better rendering of the docs.
>
> Here's a link that discusses including common code in an SVN project:
>
>
> http://tortoisesvn.net/docs/release/TortoiseSVN_en/tsvn-howto-common-projects.html#tsvn-howto-common-externals
>
> That page has three recommendations:
> 1. Use svn:externals
> 2. Use a nested working copy
> 3. Use a relative location
>
> I won't get into the details on those three recommendations, and I'm sure
> there are other solutions, but `svn:externals` seems logical and simple.
> The other two aren't appropriate for one reason or another.
>
> In a nutshell, we'd effectively `svn include` the documentation into the
> respective repos by setting an svn property like this:
>
> === SAMPLE - BATIK ===
> $ svn propget svn:externals batik
> documentation/        //
> svn.apache.org/repos/asf/xmlgraphics/site/trunk/content/batik/
> ===
>
> === SAMPLE - COMMONS ===
> $ svn propget svn:externals commons
> documentation/        //
> svn.apache.org/repos/asf/xmlgraphics/site/trunk/content/commons/
> ===
>
> === SAMPLE - FOP ===
> $ svn propget svn:externals fop
> documentation/        //
> svn.apache.org/repos/asf/xmlgraphics/site/trunk/content/fop/
> ===
>
> NOTES:
> - the above use RELATIVE TO SCHEME PATHS, which require Subversion 1.5+…
> ABSOLUTE URLs are the Subversion pre-1.5 alternative, which causes issues
> when switching between HTTP & HTTPS
> - We can't use `svn:externals` for the parent XML Graphics Project, since
> it is also the parent for Batik, Commons & FOP docs, unless we tie it to
> specific files (which requires Subversion 1.6+).
>
> There are other Subversion 1.5+ options for specifying the `svn:externals`
> PATH (e.g., using RELATIVE or ABSOLUTE paths since their on the same
> system), but I'm not convinced of the benefits:
>
> === SAMPLE - BATIK (ABSOLUTE URL - Subversion pre-1.5) ===
> $ svn propget svn:externals batik
> documentation/
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/xmlgraphics/site/trunk/content/batik/
> ===
>
> === SAMPLE - BATIK (ABSOLUTE PATH - Subversion 1.5+) ===
> $ svn propget svn:externals batik
> documentation/        /repos/asf/xmlgraphics/site/trunk/content/batik/
> ===
>
> === SAMPLE - BATIK (RELATIVE PATH - Subversion 1.5+) ===
> $ svn propget svn:externals batik
> documentation/        ../site/trunk/content/batik/
> ===
>
> === SAMPLE - BATIK (RELATIVE TO SCHEME - useful for those accessing via
> HTTP or HTTPS - Subversion 1.5+) ===
> $ svn propget svn:externals batik
> documentation/        //
> svn.apache.org/repos/asf/xmlgraphics/site/trunk/content/batik/
> ===
>
> There is a recommendation that specific revisions are used for
> `svn:externals`, which helps when you don't have control over the other
> system. I don't think this is necessary or helpful for TRUNK, although I
> wonder how tagged branches would be affected… It's possible tagged branches
> would need a revision to ensure they are STATIC respective to their
> code/documentation versions. This may require the added step to the RELEASE
> process of switching the specific Documentation Revision to keep it in sync
> w CODE.
>
> BTW, I did notice that the Batik portion of the documentation is ~330MB. I
> was going to start with XML Graphics Commons and see how it worked, before
> I went to FOP and eventually Batik...
>
> Warm regards,
>
> Clay
>
>


-- 
pascal

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message