I'll investigate the ANT stuff. 

As for including the docs in the dist, I don't believe there's an option at 
present. I'll investigate that as well. 





On Feb 5, 2013, at 1:56 PM, Glenn Adams <gl...@skynav.com> wrote:

> ok; how about the question about future releases? until now, batik, 
> xgc-commons, and fop could be released with source artifacts that contained 
> document sources; but now, it doesn't seem like that is possible, or at least 
> the "dist-src" build targets do not go out to collect the new documentation 
> sources and copy them into the generated source artifact;
> while you are at it, the old "publish.xml" ant files seem to be obsolete as 
> well; are there any other ant updates needed to rid us of obsolete doc work 
> flow?
> On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 2:17 PM, Clay Leeds <the.webmaes...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi Glenn,
>> The documentation exists solely in the ASF CMS, and so fop/src/documentation 
>> is obsolete. We purposely did not delete the src/documentation path until we 
>> were completely sure we weren't going back. I suppose we're thereā€¦
>> I'm happy to nuke ye olde documentation Forrest-based 'xdoc' directories.
>> After I do that, I'll update the Document Management page with updated 
>> instructions:
>> http://xmlgraphics.apache.org/fop/dev/doc.html
>> On Feb 5, 2013, at 9:44 AM, Glenn Adams <gl...@skynav.com> wrote:
>>> where do we edit documentation now? is fop/src/documentation now obsolete? 
>>> if so, then why is it still in the tree? how will we do releases and still 
>>> include documentation if it lives in another tree?

Reply via email to