<< [compiling] the spring reference documentation (2.9MB+3MB of images) takes 2.5 minutes
I forgot to mention: 2.5 mins for HTML single + HTML multi + PDF... Ciao, R Il giorno 08/ott/2012 22:00, "Raffaele P. Guidi" <[email protected]> ha scritto: > And our unit and integration tests take a long, long time to run but they > are worth _every single_ millisecond. Now, our documentation has a lot of > room for improvement and, if you are worried about elapsed time, a separate > build could be triggered when only the docbook sources are modified. > > In any case the velocity dbf toolkit docs (35k of document) take only 24 > seconds to build on my machine while the spring reference documentation > (2.9MB+3MB of images) take 2.5 minutes - I think it is pretty affordable. > > The real matter is whether we want to switch or not. > > Ciao, > R > > On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 9:48 PM, Christoph Engelbert > <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Yeah since docbook uses XSLT to generate the result it's not that >> fast but we have a buildserver, who cares? :) >> >> Am 08.10.2012 16:00, schrieb Simone Tripodi: >> > I experienced docbook to publish MyBatis (formerly Apache iBATIS) >> > manuals (both pdf/html sites) and to generate them on my local machine >> > (2.3 GHz Intel Core i5, 4Gb 1333 MHz DDR3) required a laaaaaaaaarge >> > amount of time, so we migrated to Maven xdoc and reduced that time in >> > minutes. >> > >> > And yes, it was part of the build via Maven plugin. >> > >> > My 0.02 cents, >> > -Simo >> > >> > http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/ >> > http://simonetripodi.livejournal.com/ >> > http://twitter.com/simonetripodi >> > http://www.99soft.org/ >> > >> > >> > On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 3:07 PM, Raffaele P. Guidi >> > <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> I agree but docbook and his toolsuite helps organizing ideas in a >> >> consistent reference document (well, a book). That should be >> differently >> >> organized than the site itself. See spring or hibernate or, if you >> want to >> >> stay closer to home, apache velocity documentation. They all use >> docbook >> >> and have great docs (not a cohincidence IMHO). >> >> >> >> Regards, >> >> Raffaele >> >> Il giorno 08/ott/2012 14:09, "Olivier Lamy" <[email protected]> ha >> scritto: >> >> >> >>> could that be integrated in a maven site build ? Is there any maven >> >>> plugin for docbook ? >> >>> Because for javadoc maven is helpfull and well integrated for >> >>> deployment to directmemory.a.o >> >>> >> >>> And IMHO the most important is to write doc (not discussing on the >> >>> tool to do it :P ) >> >>> >> >>> 2012/10/8 Raffaele P. Guidi <[email protected]>: >> >>>> Yeah I know, I'm proposing a change as I'm not 100% satisfied with >> it and >> >>>> Docbook really helps in building consistent documentation. >> >>>> >> >>>> What do you think about it? >> >>>> >> >>>> Ciao, >> >>>> R >> >>>> Il giorno 08/ott/2012 11:35, "Simone Tripodi" < >> [email protected]> >> >>> ha >> >>>> scritto: >> >>>> >> >>>>> Good morning, >> >>>>> >> >>>>> to publish documentation like the one on >> >>>>> http://directmemory.apache.org/ we used APT and xdoc Maven's >> format, >> >>>>> not docbook. >> >>>>> >> >>>>> best, >> >>>>> -Simo >> >>>>> >> >>>>> http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/ >> >>>>> http://simonetripodi.livejournal.com/ >> >>>>> http://twitter.com/simonetripodi >> >>>>> http://www.99soft.org/ >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> On Sat, Oct 6, 2012 at 10:40 PM, Christoph Engelbert >> >>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>>>>> I worked with the docbook standard in a company before. It worked >> >>>>>> very well for documentation of an SOAP webservice and was >> >>>>>> "relatively" easy to customize in terms of layouts. >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> So +1 from me for using docbook to create pdf and html from the >> >>>>>> docbook standard xml. >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> I found a really good xml editor with direct docbook support, just >> >>>>>> need to search for it again :-) >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> Cheers Chris >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> Am 06.10.2012 22:36, schrieb Raffaele P. Guidi: >> >>>>>>> Yep, it was docbook. I think it brings to extremely well done >> >>>>>>> documentation. Do you guys think that it could be worth giving it >> a >> >>> try? >> >>>>>>> Ciao, >> >>>>>>> R >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> On Sat, Oct 6, 2012 at 10:24 PM, Raffaele P. Guidi < >> >>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> You are welcome, thanks for getting involved :) of course adding >> >>> docs >> >>>>> to >> >>>>>>>> the DM maven site is the preferred way even though I wouldn't say >> >>> that >> >>>>> we >> >>>>>>>> are an excellence, when it comes to docs and probably an easier >> way >> >>> to >> >>>>>>>> write them would help. Has anyone proposals about it? I really >> like >> >>>>> how the >> >>>>>>>> spring framework is documented (I think it's done with a lucene >> >>> tool, >> >>>>> don't >> >>>>>>>> remember exactly how it is called and my google karma tonight is >> >>> low). >> >>>>>>>> Ciao, >> >>>>>>>> R >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> On Sat, Oct 6, 2012 at 9:47 PM, Christoph Engelbert < >> >>>>> [email protected]>wrote: >> >>>>>>>>> Hey guys, >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> so the account creation was successful :-) Thanks for the given >> >>>>>>>>> trust I'm totally proud. >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> The first question is how to do documentation for Lightning? Is >> >>>>>>>>> there a preferred way to document subprojects or do they get >> there >> >>>>>>>>> own part on the main projects page (like it seems to be on the >> >>>>>>>>> commons projects)? >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> Cheers Chris >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> -- >> >>> Olivier Lamy >> >>> Talend: http://coders.talend.com >> >>> http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy >> >>> >> >> >
