ok so: 1. doxia-book from Doxia to Doxia Sitetools, same artifact coordinates: org.apache.maven.doxia:doxia-book, 1.2 is from Doxia tree, 1.3-SNAPSHOT will be from Doxia Sitetools
2. doxia-maven-plugin from Doxia to Doxia Tools, same artifact coordinates: org.apache.maven.doxia:doxia-maven-plugin 1.2 is from Doxia tree, 1.3-SNAPSHOT will be from Doxia Tools 3. maven-doxia-tools from Maven Shared to Doxia Sitetools, changing artifact coordinates from org.apache.maven.shared:maven-doxia-tools to org.apache.maven.doxia:maven-doxia-tools Notice: the actual name in pom [1] is "Maven Doxia Integration Tools", changing the artifactId to maven-doxia-integration-tools would be more complete but IMHO somewhat verbose doxia-test-docs is another story I still don't fully understand, it stays for the moment in Doxia: we can have another look at it after previous changes Regards, Hervé [1] http://maven.apache.org/shared/maven-doxia-tools/project-summary.html Le vendredi 30 mars 2012 10:07:16 Lukas Theussl a écrit : > Dennis Lundberg wrote: > > On 2012-03-29 09:13, Lukas Theussl wrote: > >> I agree that they don't belong into core, but I rather thought of > >> moving > >> them into doxia-tools instead. Not sure what is better. > > > > This was my thought also. > > > >> OTOH, neither book nor maven-plugin have been maintained (AFAIK) since > >> they were moved out of the sandbox, and IMO they don't work too well. > >> In > >> particular there are problems reported with Maven 3 (DOXIA-438) which > >> I > >> haven't tested, but I wanted to suggest a long time ago to deprecate > >> and > >> ultimately remove them. > > > > If agree that they should be moved, let's start with that. If the target > > is doxia-tools then let's move them there, prior to the 1.3 release of > > Doxia and Doxia Sitetools. > > > > My feeling about Doxia Tools is that their sub projects shouldn't be > > released all at the same time. They are individual projects and should > > have their own release cycles, much like our shared components or > > plugins. > I agree for doxia-tools. Doxia and doxia-sitetools are closer coupled > though, I think they should be released together. Maybe the > doxia-maven-plugin should go into sitetools, and the book into tools? > > > Also I'd like to move maven-doxia-tools from shared over to Doxia. Given > > its description > > "Assists in using Doxia for site generation and report creation." > > Don't know where you got that from, the current pom [1] says "A > collection of tools to help the integration of Doxia in Maven plugins." > I think we also talked about renaming it to 'doxia-integration-tools' > which sounds more descriptive. > > > [1] > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/maven/shared/trunk/maven-doxia-tools/pom.xml?re > vision=1214494&view=markup > > I think that Sitetools would be a good home for it. > > Sounds reasonable. > > >> Also the doxia-test-docs should move somewhere else. > > > > What are those? They look like they could be the basis of an IT suite. > > Perhaps it should be a completely separate project under the Doxia > > umbrella? > It's not a project actually, just a collection of test resources. They > were originally added to check the correctness of the XSDs, see this > mail thread: > > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/maven-doxia-dev/200812.mbox/%3C493D > 50DF.3040705%40udo.edu%3E > > It's currently used by xdoc and fml modules, however, I'm not sure of > the usefulness, see eg my comment in > XdocValidatorTest#testValidateFiles. IMO the validation test would be > useful if it tested either a new xsd against the old test files, or some > new test files (created by a new doxia module) against the existing xsd. > But currently the test takes the old test files (from test-docs) and > validates it with the established xsds (fml-1.0-1, xdoc-2.2), so I don't > see the point. > > > Just some thoughts, unfortunately I don't have time right now to help > with any 'real' work... > > -Lukas > > >> -Lukas > >> > >> Hervé BOUTEMY wrote: > >>> while working on the relations between components, I finally found > >>> why > >>> there > >>> was something I didn't understand for a long time about Doxia suite > >>> structure: > >>> Doxia base contains book support through a plugin, but Doxia base > >>> doesn't contain documents support -- it's Doxia Sitetools. > >>> > >>> So we have a circular dependency: > >>> doxia-maven-plugin (from Doxia base) -> maven-doxia-tools -> > >>> Doxia-decoration- > >>> model (from Doxia SiteTools) -> Doxia base (xhtml, fo and itext) > >>> > >>> IMHO, doxia-book and doxia-maven-plugin should move to Doxia > >>> Sitetools > >>> [1]. > >>> > >>> This won't change the artifacts coordinate, so won't change anything > >>> for users. > >>> But this should help when explaining Doxia suite structure, which > >>> has > >>> been > >>> difficult for a long time, and having a consequence on versioning > >>> decision: > >>> should we keep base and Sitetools version at the same level or not? > >>> > >>> > >>> Any objection? Did I miss something? > >>> > >>> Regards, > >>> > >>> Hervé > >>> > >>> > >>> [1] http://maven.apache.org/doxia/doxia-sitetools/index.html > >>> > >>> -------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>> - > >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
