Niall Pemberton wrote:
I just re-published all the component sites and notice that (by
mistake) it had used a patched copy of the
maven-project-info-reports-plugin that I have in my local repo
(sorry!). Anyway I submitted a patch to maven to include the Java
version on the dependencies page. The feedback I got was they prefer
it on the project summary page - so I submitted a patch for that as
well.
Logging is an example of using different source/target versions:
http://commons.apache.org/logging/dependencies.html
http://commons.apache.org/logging/project-summary.html
The part about "It has been built using Java 1.5" in the dependencies
report isn't accurate. 1.5 is the version used (by you) to build and
publish the site. I used 1.4 when I did the logging release, so having
anything else there is misleading. I think that part should be removed.
What extra value does it give to users, providing it was correct?
This is related to publishing versioned sites that I touched upon in
another mail.
BeanUtils is an example of the same source/target versions:
http://commons.apache.org/beanutils/dependencies.html
http://commons.apache.org/beanutils/project-summary.html
My preference is to have it on the dependencies page, because I think
people are more likely to look there - but perhaps both places would
be good. I haven't had any feedback since I submitted the second
pacth, so If you think its a good idea for commons then it would be
good to vote for that JIRA bug:
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MPIR-80
Niall
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Dennis Lundberg
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
