Sorry, meant Params. Thanks.
On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 1:29 PM, Alejandro Abdelnur <[email protected]>wrote: > Mohammad, > > Would you try the following syntax for snippets: > > +---+ > ... > <dependency> > <groupId>com.cloudera.hoop</groupId> > <artifactId>hoop-client</artifactId> > <version>${project.version}</version> > </dependency> > ... > +---+ > > Thanks. > > Alejandro > > On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 1:19 PM, Params <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Following are the details of the issue we ran into: >> >> *Description:* >> I tried to add the following snippet of xml into my .apt source file >> inside >> a 'verbatim' block. >> >> >> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> <configuration> >> <property> >> <name>mapred.job.queue.name</name> >> <value>${queueName}</value> >> </property> >> <property> >> <name>error.message</name> >> <value>Something went wrong: >> ${wf:errorCode('wordcount')}</value> >> </property> >> </configuration> >> >> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> On trying to build the maven project for the site documentation, >> $ mvn site >> >> I get the following error: >> >> [ERROR] org.apache.velocity.runtime.parser.ParseException: Encountered >> ":errorCode(\'wordcount\')}</message>\n </kill/>\n <end >> >> name=\'end\'/>\n</workflow-app>\n----------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\n >> <<Notes:>>\n\n <<" at line 134, column 44. >> Was expecting one of: >> "}" ... >> <DOT> ... >> >> >> Observations: >> 1) It appears that whenever I use any text of the format: >> ${wf:errorCode('wordcount')} , APT throws a parse exception (even if its >> contained in the verbatim block). >> >> 2) Other text like ${queueName} seems to work well. >> >> 3) I tried escaping the characters - {, $, :, etc.. but it doesnt work >> either. >> >> 4) I tried using the APT Editor (Eclipse plugin). It does not give any >> errors on preview, but publishing the .apt using a 'mvn site' still fails. >> >> *Workaround (based on response from the maven nabble forum):* >> Source: >> >> http://maven.40175.n5.nabble.com/APT-Issue-with-adding-xml-code-snippets-as-Verbatim-tt4831524.html#a4831572 >> >> The idea is to assign the "complex" value to a variable, next print that >> variable: >> <value>#set($varline = '${wf:errorCode("wordcount")}') ${varline}</value> >> >> However, the display text I now get on the html page is: >> <value> ${wf:errorCode("wordcount")}</value> >> >> This is not exactly the output we desire, we would prefer the wordcount to >> appear inside single-quotes (in the html file generated) as: >> ${wf:errorCode('wordcount')} >> >> The three following combinations (of the workaround described) don't work >> (fail while running the mvn build): >> <value>#set($varline = '${wf:errorCode(\'wordcount\')}') >> ${varline}</value> >> <value>#set($varline = "${wf:errorCode('wordcount')}") ${varline}</value> >> <value>#set($varline = "${wf:errorCode(\'wordcount\')}") >> ${varline}</value> >> >> To summarize, it appears that there could be such other issues as well in >> the future (with other APT document elements) that could slow down the >> documentation process. It would be a good idea to assess the capabilities >> and shortcomings of APT. We also found that the doxia mailing lists ( >> [email protected] and doxia-dev-subscribe@maven >> .apache.org) have been shutdown and merged into the main maven list: >> http://maven.40175.n5.nabble.com/ >> >> Please let me know if any more information is required. >> -- >> Thanks, >> Params >> >> >> >> On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 12:33 PM, Mohammad Islam <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> > Hi, >> > As previously discussed, we did a POC using APT based documentation ( >> > http://maven.apache.org/doxia/references/apt-format.html). >> > In short, we found APT is very simple and easy to use. >> > However, at least in one common case, we didn't find any good way of >> > writing the EL functions. >> > (@Params: Would you please provide more details of the issue?). >> > >> > Please give your comments on the followings: >> > * Should we continue to use APT? Is there any other better option >> > available? >> > >> > * Should we move our existing official Oozie doc from twiki to APT as >> well? >> > Currently we plan to adopt the new documentation framework for Apache >> Oozie >> > site. >> > >> > >> > Regards, >> > Mohammad >> > >> >> >> >> -- >> params >> > >
