> From: Nicola Ken Barozzi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > > Does Forrest have good documentation on getting it to work > and installed? > > Yes. > > http://xml.apache.org/forrest/your-project.html > > Basically untar it, set the FORREST_HOME and add the bin to the path, > and it's done. To use the CVS version, just run "build" first. > > To create a new site, cd into the dir and run "forrest seed".
Sounds good. I'll take a look. > > That is my concern. If we offload the tools to a third > party, I don't > > want to have to wrestle with the tool we choose. Maven is > a *build* tool, > > and from what I understand, can delegate to Forrest for doc > generation. > > So as long as it is made **really*easy** for the user to > get up and running, > > I am behind it. > > Both Centipede and Maven can use Forrest for doc generation. > Centipede uses it standard, while Maven need a plugin. > Centipede also doenloads any plugin needed automatically. > > IMHO using Centipede as a build tool coupled with Forrest is > the easiest > for the user, and the most flexible for us, but that's MHO. Gump also > can run centipede projects, while Maven projects are run only > using the > generated ant file. The last time I tried centipede, it was a pain to get working. Maven has an easy declaritive document describing meta-info necessary for building the project. It is very intuitive. Centipede made me feel like I was forced into a box I didn't like for the directory structure. It just wasn't a pleasant experience. OTOH, I haven't looked at Centipede in quite a while. What has changed with it? > DISCLAIMER: I'm the original author of Centipede. I know. ;P -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
