: IMO, I think our source release should be what you get when you do a : checkout from SVN. : Building from source is more expert level, and one needs (minimally) ant set up.
meh. i don't really disagree with you, this is one of hte points i was trying to make about wondering why we had two distinct source releases instead of just one at the "dev" route. my comment was based on the rc1 as it existing -- that the solr source releases didn't have any clear indication of how to build the forrest docs. (and in every past release, we didn't need any indication, because they were already included pre-built) FWIW: if you do an svn checkout, you *do* get the pre-built HTML versions of the forrest documents... https://svn.apache.org/viewvc/lucene/dev/branches/lucene_solr_3_1/solr/site/ https://svn.apache.org/viewvc/lucene/dev/branches/lucene_solr_3_1/lucene/docs/ ...hence my point that it seemed silly we weren't including them in the rc1 src packages. : As far as docs - I think most people look online first? They would : certainly look online if they didn't see anything local. by thta same rationale, we don't need to include javadocs in any release, because you could always find them online (and if i wanted to be snarky: you could always go find the java source itself online too) In any case: we don't (yet) have version specific copies of the solr forrest docs online. the point behind having the docs in the releases has always been so that you had a copy that matched the copy of the code you were using. leaving the pre-built docs in the src release seems like a pretty simple and easy short term win. -Hoss --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
