Now it's only core we have javadocs for. What about all the other projects? That was the nice thing about Tim's. Shouldn't we get the scripts from Tim and but then in svn and then use those to generate from?
Frank On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 1:55 AM, Gerolf Seitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > fyi, it's synced now. > > Gerolf > > On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 1:17 AM, James Carman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > wrote: > > > The site doesn't point where you put those Javadocs. It points to > > tobrien's public_html directory. > > > > > > On 3/13/08, Gerolf Seitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > i uploaded the 1.3.2 docs to [0]. > > > the "JavaDocs" link on http://wicket.apache.org should be changed after > > the > > > next sync. > > > > > > Martijn, i guess we don't want to put the generated mvn site in the svn > > > repository? > > > for now i uploaded it directly to our site, since it's easy to recreate > > it. > > > if you think we should put it in the repository, let me know. > > > > > > cheers, > > > Gerolf > > > > > > [0] > > http://wicket.apache.org/docs/wicket-1.3.2/wicket/apidocs/index.html > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 11:57 PM, James Carman < > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > The Javadoc accessible from the Wicket site says 1.3.0-SNAPSHOT in > > the > > > > title. Shouldn't that be updated with the 1.3.1 stuff at least > > (since > > > > that's what the site says is the latest release)? Or, I'd probably > > > > just go ahead and replace it with the 1.3.2 stuff since it has > > already > > > > been released. > > > > > > > > > >
