Hi, I've been working in the migration of the forrest documentation. I've just moved the main part (converting the forrest docs to maven docs using xstl - Thanks Arvid!) and now it remains the tomahawk and the sandbox documentation, which will be placed in the correspondent subproject. Every subproject is going to have it's own documentation site, and every site will be linked using the new multisite feature from maven 2.0.2, so the user can access all the documentation in a clear way. I am just migrating the current documentation as is, but it would be the right moment to decide wether to change the documentation structure. I like the "mini-guide' thing that maven uses in its site, so maybe we could do something like this by getting some of the useful documentation now in the wiki and in the current site. If you try to build the site with maven, you will see that everything is work in progress including the banner. I began to design a new banner, so the site could have a more modern look, but I haven't had the time to do so (yes, as Martin says we will have to open a JIRA to request 48-hour days...). So, if someone have good design skills and wanted to collaborate, now it is the right time :-). IMO, what has to be in the banner somehow is the feather, the title, and the logo (the face drawn with simple lines)...
Also, the tests have to be set up, so if someone wants to help... it is just to move the current tests to the myfaces test area and try to build and execute them with the normal maven lifecycle... BTW, once everything is ok and we have the brand new zone, continuum will be great! Regards, Bruno 2005/12/30, Bill Dudney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > I'm +1 on this for sure and I'd be glad to help. > > I finally have a few cycles this weekend and early next week. > > I'd also be interested in helping getting the automated build going > with Continuum on our zone. > > TTFN, > > -bd > > On Dec 29, 2005, at 11:58 AM, Sean Schofield wrote: > > > I am proposing we switch to Maven2. I think we now have enough people > > who are ready willing and able to sustain the Maven effort. In the > > interest of time I will not go into why I think Maven is better then > > Ant (I'm probably not the best person for that anyways.) > > > > Here are the details of my proposal: > > > > 1.) Minor changes to the svn structure to become more Maven friendly. > > These are minor changes to the directory layout and the result will be > > something similar to what we have in the test repository.[1] > > > > Changes will be made to the trunk only. We will also backup the > > current structure (like we did before the last reorg) so nothing will > > be lost and we can go back to the old if things don't work. > > > > 2.) Abandon (but do not remove) the current Ant scripts. I don't > > think they're worth changing. It will be much simpler to focus on the > > maven script and just push through the pain. > > > > 3.) Temporarily abandon the nightly builds. Make an announcement on > > the user list that nightly builds will be unavailable for the next > > week or two while we get the new infrastructure setup. The nightly > > builds rely on the Ant scripts. > > > > 4.) New Mavenized website. Slowly migrate to a Maven generated > > website. At first only the essential pieces will be there (basic > > overview, mailing list and jira info, etc.) Once the site is being > > automated and published it will be easy to add pieces back each day. > > > > 5.) Move to a solaris zone for building the nightlies and publishing > > the website. > > > > I think the best way to proceed with this is to jump right in and push > > through. Bruno has offered to help and the Tobago team has already > > provided some assistance. Wendy and James from the Struts team have > > offered to help when possible and now John Fallows is offering his > > assistance. > > > > I will go ahead with the reorg in the next few days if I get enough > > +1. Keep in mind that the existing maven script already builds the > > jar files so developers will continue to have access to the latest and > > greatest. Also keep in mind that I have done one SVN reorg for > > MyFaces already and that with SVN its easy to "roll back" if we aren't > > happy with the results. > > > > Thoughts? > > > > Sean > > > > [1] http://svn.apache.org/repos/test/myfaces/ > >
