I'd prefer option 1
Robert
Op Sun, 03 May 2015 11:09:46 +0200 schreef Hervé BOUTEMY
<[email protected]>:
option 3 is confusing
I like option 1, I find it more clear than option 2: I don't think we'll
have
scalability issues, since the evolution we need to document won't change
in
the future
notice that using Markdown, or perhaps html, you could use colspans to
merge
content that is the same between version
and one idea: instead of "Reference", tell "provided by Maven Shared
Resources" or "provided by Checkstyle"
then this doc could explain "how to use a ruleset provided by
Checkstyle" /
"how to use a ruleset provided by another artifact"
Regards,
Hervé
Le samedi 2 mai 2015 16:32:47 Jeff Jensen a écrit :
I suggest alternative 2 as 1 doesn't scale well with new versions and 3
is
more confusing than 2.
On Sat, May 2, 2015 at 4:11 PM, Christopher <[email protected]> wrote:
> Of the choices, alternative 1 seems the easiest for me.
>
> On Sat, May 2, 2015, 16:10 Dennis Lundberg <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm trying to visualize which version of the Checkstyle plugin
> > includes which predefined rulesets. There's are 3 alternatives for
you
>
> > to look at here:
>
https://maven.apache.org/plugins-archives/maven-checkstyle-plugin-LATEST/c
> onfig/index.html>
> > Please let me know which alternative you think is the most easy to
> > understand.
> >
> > --
> > Dennis Lundberg
> >
> >
---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
