From: "Sam Ruby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> > Ok then, what do you think if I do the opposite and add my tags to the
Gump
> > descriptor? Would Gump still love it?
>
> Gump will ignore anything it does not understand.
>
> We should probably either work towards consolidated documentation or start
> employing namespaces...
I'm +1 for consolidation :-)
What I can do is to simply add tags to the gump descriptor to make it
contain all the stuff I need.
Then we can put that on Gump and see if it runs.
Finally, we can discuss about getting a better DTD out of it.
Since it's about 8 PM here, and I'm hungry, I'll do this tomorrow.
I'll do it for Forrest, which has the latest project-info.xml version.
Since the Forrest run will generate the whole new xml.apache.org site, we
will need a special <site> tag that copies the docs as root, and not as a
subproject.
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
