Le 26/02/2011 17:11, Phil Steitz a écrit : > On 2/25/11 5:15 AM, Luc Maisonobe wrote: >> Tag: >> <http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/proper/math/tags/MATH_2_2_RC5/> >> >> All artifacts in Nexus staging repository: >> <https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-051/org/apache/commons/commons-math/2.2/> >> >> site: >> <http://people.apache.org/builds/commons/math/2.2/RC5/> >> >> Clirr report: >> <http://people.apache.org/builds/commons/math/2.2/RC5/clirr-report.html> >> >> Votes, please. This vote will close in 72 hours, 2011-02-28T11:00:00 UTC >> >> [ ] +1 Release these artifacts >> [ ] +0 OK, but... >> [ ] -0 OK, but really should fix... >> [ ] -1 I oppose this release because... >> >> Thanks! >> >> Luc >> >> > I am struggling a little on this one. The code is good. Builds and > tests fine. Sigs are good. Release contents are good. But the user > guide packaging is not as good as 2.0-2.1, IMO. The reason that I > introduced the siteMods stuff in 2.0 was so that we could bundle > just the user guide as a self-contained set of web pages in the > binary distro. Just file filtering from a full site build results > in broken links in the nav and the appearance of the whole site, > with only the user guide content available. On the other hand, to > fix this, you need to do what the build script does or something > similar (at least I couldn't find a way to get it to work > otherwise), which means you can't just have maven build and deploy > the whole release without additional scripting or commands. The nav > links in the user guide into the user guide itself work and the > links from the user guide to the bundled javadoc work, so this is > really just an appearance/useability issue. > > So I guess I am +0 on this RC. The broken links / appearance issues > are not enough for -1, or even -0, but I would rather ship the > cleaner version. I don't know how nexus works, but I would expect > that it should be possible to generate just the binary distro and > push it out there somehow if you decide to do another RC.
OK. Perhaps I could try what Sebb suggested: using the siteMods/pom.xml and siteMods/site.xml stuff directly from maven. I could even do the site manually with your script and later use mvn deploy. I will give it a try first without cancelling this RC vote. If I succeed in having a fully functional menu with only the required links, then I'll cancel the vote and push an RC6. What should we do about the duplicate javadoc in binary ? Do we keep both the jar and the expanded version in the binary zip or do we suppress one of them ? If we suppress one, which one ? Luc > > Phil >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >> >> > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
