FWIW,  
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/LOGGING/Managing+the+Logging+Services+Web+Site
 
<https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/LOGGING/Managing+the+Logging+Services+Web+Site>
 discusses how the logging services web site and the individual logging 
projects are built.  I’ve heard rumblings that the ASF CMS is being or has been 
replaced or that you can at least use git but I haven’t investigated that. I 
can tell you I have a love/hate relationship with how the Log4j documentation 
is created. For Java it makes more sense since it generates some neat stuff 
automatically but I am not sure what added value it would bring to a project 
like log4php.

So as far as that goes, the only thing that matters is that the source for the 
site is in source control - we could even request a GitHub project to host all 
the logging subproject web sites if we want - and that the generated site(s) 
are checked in to match ASF Infra’s expectations. You can read about the ASF 
CMS at https://www.apache.org/dev/cms <https://www.apache.org/dev/cms>, The 
only documentation on using git for the rendered site that I could find is at 
https://blogs.apache.org/infra/entry/git_based_websites_available 
<https://blogs.apache.org/infra/entry/git_based_websites_available>.

Ralph

> On Oct 29, 2019, at 8:35 PM, Kate Gray <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> I've updated some of the source documents.  It looks like it's pretty broken 
> - apigen, for example, isn't stable above PHP5.    The Release Candidate is 
> really brittle, requiring specific commits of other libraries.
> 
> There's an issue, LOG4PHP-192, that mentions using phing.  As I mentioned in 
> the issue, I'm personally in favor of using phing, as it would make it 
> possible to build .phar (compiled archives) that are a bit easier to work 
> with.  A lot of tools are distributed that way these days.
> 
> If we're just generating .html files, we could go the native PHP way and use 
> Sculpin to generate the site.  It takes twig (a simple template engine), 
> markdown and spits out static HTML.
> 
> API documentation could be done with phpDocumentor, phpDox, or doxygen.  I'm 
> a bit partial to phpDox personally.
> 
> What do people think?
> 
> Kate

Reply via email to