On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 4:29 AM, Pascal Sancho <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi, > > Since XCG website repository includes now all XCG sub-projects, there > should be a Jira entry for that. > By "include all" do you mean "includes all documentation for XCG sub-projects"? I'm personally not comfortable with this arrangement, because it complicates releases and doesn't properly separate distinct project assets. > > In the same way, the doc management page should be moved to XCG general > website; WDYT? > > 2013/2/5 Clay Leeds <[email protected]> > >> 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. >> >> Clay >> >> >> On Feb 5, 2013, at 1:56 PM, Glenn Adams <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]>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 fop/src/documentation is obsolete.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 there… >>> >>> 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 <[email protected]> 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? >>> >>> >>> >> > > > -- > pascal
