> > Is http://james.apache.org/index.html using pages generated from
> > the correct version of the xdocs?
As Danny said, we'll be separating the site docs into its own repository.
> As a quick fix, how about updating the docs. in the CVS head so that the
> documentation link on the main page reads "Latest Development Version"
> rather than "James 2.1 documentation"
Actually, those docs SHOULD be for James v2.1. The only ones that should be
off-kilter are the javadocs. Are you seeing anything else that seems out of
synch?
> Ultimately, I too think it would probably be a better idea to have
> the docs for the current stable version.
Anyone who wants to help re-org the web site is welcome to help. :-)
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
