On Dec 18, 2012, at 11:30 AM, Jordan Rose <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Dec 18, 2012, at 11:29 , Ted Kremenek <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On Dec 17, 2012, at 7:53 PM, Sean Silva <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>> But it has its own website, clang-analyzer.llvm.org.
>>>
>>> I'm curious about this. Why is it not sufficient to simply be
>>> clang.llvm.org/analyzer (which works)?
>>
>> For reference, the fact that this URL works is a curiosity, not something
>> users know about. We don't direct users to that URL. I did not come up
>> with this setup. Apparently it was easier to setup the website this way at
>> the time. If it makes sense to move the analyzer website to a different
>> repository, I am completely in favor of doing so.
>
> ...although I agree with Sean that docs/analyzer/ should stay in the same
> repo as the analyzer source (even if it moves elsewhere in the Clang repo).
Yes, I absolutely agree with the both of you here. The only points I wanted to
make clearly were…
(1) We don't care about clang.llvm.org/analyzer
(2) We care very much about clang-analyzer.llvm.org.
I very much appreciate all the work that Sean is doing here.
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
