Lukas Theussl wrote:
Dennis Lundberg wrote:
See below...
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: ltheussl
Date: Mon Sep 3 08:13:54 2007
New Revision: 572361
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=572361&view=rev
Log:
Fix links
Modified:
maven/site/trunk/src/site/apt/guides/mini/guide-central-repository-upload.apt
maven/site/trunk/src/site/apt/plugins/index.apt
Modified:
maven/site/trunk/src/site/apt/guides/mini/guide-central-repository-upload.apt
URL:
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/maven/site/trunk/src/site/apt/guides/mini/guide-central-repository-upload.apt?rev=572361&r1=572360&r2=572361&view=diff
==============================================================================
---
maven/site/trunk/src/site/apt/guides/mini/guide-central-repository-upload.apt
(original)
+++
maven/site/trunk/src/site/apt/guides/mini/guide-central-repository-upload.apt
Mon Sep 3 08:13:54 2007
@@ -232,7 +232,7 @@
* {{{http://docs.codehaus.org/display/HAUSMATES/Maven+Guide}Codehaus}}
-~~ * {{{http://jetty.mortbay.org}MortBay Jetty}}
+ * {{{http://jetty.mortbay.com}MortBay Jetty}}
* {{{http://www.opensymphony.com/}OpenSymphony}}
Modified: maven/site/trunk/src/site/apt/plugins/index.apt
URL:
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/maven/site/trunk/src/site/apt/plugins/index.apt?rev=572361&r1=572360&r2=572361&view=diff
==============================================================================
--- maven/site/trunk/src/site/apt/plugins/index.apt (original)
+++ maven/site/trunk/src/site/apt/plugins/index.apt Mon Sep 3
08:13:54 2007
@@ -23,99 +23,99 @@
*-----------------------------------------------------------*--------+----------------------------------------------+
| <<core plugins>> | | <Plugins corresponding to default core phases
(ie. clean, compile). They may have muliple goals as well.>
*-----------------------------------------------------------+--------+----------------------------------------------+
Why do we need to use the full absolute path to the plugins?
Shouldn't ./maven-clean-plugin/ be enough?
It's enough to generate a valid link on your web site.
However, I just committed an enhancement to doxia-linkcheck that lets
you specify a base URL for links that start with '/', ie links that are
relative to the root of your website after deployment. This makes it
possible to check whether these links actually exist (online). I don't
see how you could do that with relative links because the targets are
generated by completely unrelated projects, that just happen to be
deployed to the same web site.
Is the project defines the url in its pom, linkcheck should be able to
calculate the "real" url of a relative link. And then test that online,
if the target of the link is not part of the generated site:
1. Check if link to local file works
2. Check if online link works
Otherwise, the two forms are equivalent, or are there any drawbacks that
I am not aware of?
Well, using absolute links is not a recommended practice. It makes it
difficult to relocate parts of a site, without having to go through it
and change *all* the links.
-Lukas
-| {{{maven-clean-plugin/} <<<clean>>>}} | 2.1.1
| Clean up after the build.
+| {{{/plugins/maven-clean-plugin/} <<<clean>>>}} | 2.1.1
| Clean up after the build.
*-----------------------------------------------------------+--------+----------------------------------------------+
[snip]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Dennis Lundberg
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
