Why would we want to do that? Under the /site/docs directory, they need to be served up as loose HTML...
IMO the XML files shouldn't be checked into SVN because they are auto-generated. The same goes for Sandcastle files.. However, in the release packages, I think we should include the XML files as well as a fully functional version of the Sandcastle docs that can be viewed locally. I personally thing CHMs are terrible user experience, and I'd much rather have a static HTML site I can browse locally, if we're going to bother including a copy of the documentation in the package, vs just hosting it online and calling that good (this is what most projects these days do). Good thing about hosting online -- searchable via google. Thanks, Troy On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 9:48 PM, Michael Herndon <mhern...@wickedsoftware.net> wrote: > Could we store sandcastle docs as a single zip/chm? > > > > On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 12:37 AM, Troy Howard <thowar...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> At one time I had a SVN server set up at work that had a post-commit >> hook set up that would generate a static HTML site from the XML doc >> files using Sandcastle. So.. It can be done. That was about 3-4 years >> ago and I don't work at that company any longer, so I don't have >> access to the details of how that was done. >> >> Regarding SVN locations... >> >> Autogenerated XML doc files should go in the ~/trunk/doc/<component> >> folders. The Sandcastle generated static HTML should go under >> ~/site/docs/<version> folders. >> >> I'll see if I can't dig up some info on how to generate static HTML >> with Sandcastle. >> >> Thanks, >> Troy >> >> >> On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 9:15 PM, Michael Herndon >> <mhern...@wickedsoftware.net> wrote: >> >>We have a folder /trunk/docs, shouldn't this be the place for that? >> > >> > We should have a live site for the documentation that people can browse, >> > similar to the parent project's site. >> > http://lucene.apache.org/java/3_4_0/api/all/index.html. It makes it the >> > documentation more accessible. >> > >> > The rub is that Sandcastle & SHFB generates html files with guid names, >> xml >> > & bin files that map to the html files, and aspx pages which acts as the >> > glue. The aspx pages parses the xml/bin files which creates the document >> > site. Thus we're now required to use a server that knows how to serve up >> > aspx pages. >> > >> > If any one knows a way to generate just vanilla html using Sandcastle & >> > SHFB, I could just create a folder per version and push the docs to >> > incubator site. But so far I haven't found an option for this. >> > >> > Keeping the generated help docs inside of source would still require for >> > users to setup a local website just to view the documentation and it adds >> > extra noise in the project. >> > >> > In the release we can provide a zipped file of the site and a generated >> .chm >> > or even help2/3 files. >> > >> > On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 11:38 PM, Prescott Nasser <geobmx...@hotmail.com >> >wrote: >> > >> >> >> >> > >> >> > We should probably fix the ClsCompliance warnings if they have not >> >> already >> >> > been fixed >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> We will have some issues with this - some are marked volatile - which >> >> basically have to be a non-CLS compliant type (as far as my research is >> >> finding) Anyone have thoughts? I went through and replaced sbyte -> >> Int16, >> >> and uint -> Int64, but I'm having an issue with this, and I don't think >> >> removing the volatile keyword is the right solution. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > find a place to put the generated documentation. >> >> >> >> >> >> We have a folder /trunk/docs, shouldn't this be the place for that? >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > I remember someone mentioning he/she was unable to access a class from >> >> > VB.NET. The class had public fields & properties with the same names >> but >> >> > different casing. The fields should be private. >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > The link in the readme is a dead link: >> >> > http://lucene.apache.org/lucene.net/docs/2.4.0/ The docs generated by >> >> > sandcastle & SHFB require a server that allows aspx files to be >> executed. >> >> > We should either remove the link from the readme or find the docs a >> new >> >> > home and update the link. >> >> >> >> >> >> We should generate new documentation and update the link >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > I'll see if I can setup automating Lucene.Net <http://lucene.net> >> nuget >> >> > package creation for trunk in the next day or so. >> >> > >> >> > - Michael >> >> > >> >> > On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 5:48 PM, Prescott Nasser < >> geobmx...@hotmail.com >> >> >wrote: >> >> > >> >> > > Hey all seems like we are set with 2.9.4? Feedback has been positive >> >> and >> >> > > its been quiet. Do we feel ready to vote for a new release? >> >> > > >> >> > > -Prescott >> >> > > >> >> > > Sent from my Windows Phone >> >> >> > >> >
