On Jun 21, 2012, at 17:01 , Jan Lehnardt wrote:
>
> On Jun 21, 2012, at 16:55 , Simon Metson wrote:
>
>> Hey,
>>> Sorry, my bad, it actually ships with Macs as far as I can tell. I updated
>>> the README.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Cool.
>>> Did you mean to do `make dev && utils/run` or is `./bin/couchdb` done in a
>>> `make install` target?
>> It was done in the make install target. make dev && utils/run works.
>>>
>>>> * did a make clean in both docs and main dir, once I did that the docs
>>>> build fails:
>>>> SEVERE: Exception
>>>> javax.xml.transform.TransformerException:
>>>> org.apache.fop.fo.ValidationException:
>>>> "{http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Format}block"; is not a valid child of
>>>> "fo:root"! (See position 1110:144)
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I can't reproduce this in my dev repo or clean checkout.
>> Ah, I cocked up; I'd accidentally removed the jars when running the make
>> clean :)
>>> It is already linked up in Futon, pointing to
>>> /_docs/manual/couchdb-manual.html-dir/index.html (see 06210b9), but it just
>>> jumps to the docs and out of futon, which isn't very user-friendly. We
>>> could iframe things, or open the docs in a new window/tab, although I tend
>>> to not like that :)
>>>
>
> Cool, thanks :)
>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I think I mean where do we go now. Agree that integrating the docs into
>> futon would be nice (though I don't know how to do that with docbook, not
>> used it before now, will dig in).
>
> This has nothing to do with docbook, we generate HTML and we can link to that
> in Futon, I don't think we want to generate the Futon-docs part in docbook,
> but happy to be proven wrong. I think it'd be easer to make a docs.html in
> futon that keeps the header and sidebar and just shows the /_docs/... link.
Like this:
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/82149/couchdb-futon-docs.png
Source:
https://github.com/janl/couchdb/commit/bcfa57bee491837e91c65045870aaddf706b303d
Plus fine-tuning :)
Cheers
Jan
--
>
>
>> What about things like pulling in Dale's jquery.couch.js docs
>> (daleharvey.github.com/jquery.couch.js-docs/symbols/index.html)?
>
> We should definitely consider this, but I think that is out of scope for this
> particular patch.
>
>
>> Once this is integrated with the main make I guess it makes sense to have a
>> "normal" make just create the html for serving, and making building the pdf
>> etc something you explicitly trigger.
>
> Agreed :)
>
> Cheers
> Jan
> --
>
>
