At 00:12 08.05.2001 +1000, Peter Donald wrote:
>At 01:13 7/5/01 +0200, Ceki G�lc� wrote:
>>With your permission I would like to eliminate some of the alternatives.
>This is surely going upset some people. I am asking for the permission to
>make some potentially controversial changes. Let me repeat that I do not
>consider myself as an expert in ANT or to know the optimal directory
>structures. As such, you are strongly encouraged to make suggestions.
>
>The problem is existing projects. We can not create too many conflicts and
>confusing points.
Agreed.
>The sticking points I can remember from last time I
>edited it were located in two groups. The first group
>1. name of intermediate directory
>2. name of directory that contains tools and utilities used in build
>process but not in final product
>
>Unfortunately half projects use "build" for (1) and half use it for (2). My
>recomendation would be to invent a new name for (1) that conflicts with no
>existing project - perhaps "intermediate". For (2) I recomend "tools" as
>that makes it very clear what is contained within that directory.
I have asked this before but is there a need for an intermediary directory? For
example, to take an example I am familiar with, Tomcat 4.x, a damn good project I
might add, has a build/ directory and a dist/ directory where dist/ is a copy of
build/. I do not know why Tomcat is doing this but it is. Other projects are doing
similar things. I am obviously missing something...
>The other group was
>1. name of directory of generated local docs if any
>2. name of directory of generated www docs if any
>3. Whether local docs == www docs
>
>Some projects don't have any generated docs in CVS. Others only have one
>version. Others have one version in CVS and one local, the version in CVS
>being dated to last release.
>
>Ideally we wouldn't have any generated docs in CVS but as no-one has
>stepped up to fix that - I guess we gotta keep it.
Have you seen my reply to Vincent on this?
>Some projects don't do "releases" as such and thus can synch the web docs
>whenever they want. Thus they don't need to have a separate www and local
>docs (assuming local==www).
>
>In an ideal world there would not be a need at all for any docs in CVS and
>(thus no www/docs dir) however until this is in place I am really not sure
>what to do.
>
>I think we should make it mandatory that local==www for simplicity sake.
+1
IMHO, it is quite tasteful to have the local (user's) copy of a project to contain an
exact replica of the project web-site. Anybody disagree? Cheers, Ceki
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
