Tom Hobbs wrote:
Speaking to Sim just now, he raised something that I skipped past entirely.
I've been changing the Jini Specs from HTML into a style which matches
the rest of our website - i.e. markdown. In retrospect, maybe that
wasn't the right thing to do, because (as has been pointed out) we'll
need to convert the specs back from markdown into HTML for easy
download/reading on part of the users.
Actually don't rush into reversing your changes, lets think it through,
Markdown is intended to be viewable as text, we've got a doc-src
directory, we could keep your changes and include markdown as a build
dependency.
As I mention in this email, having Javadocs in a different format to
the website is okay, and I guess that having the Jini Spec in a
different format is okay also. So I'm going to rollback my changes
for the Jini Spec only. This way we can just pull it off the site SVN
for easy packaging in/with the release.
Ok, can we go in the other direction though? I like to build it
locally, make changes, update and check links etc.
Can it be staged via an ant task.
Still a markdown javadoc tool sounds neat, makes source code easier to
read too.
If there is an ant task to assist developers to download the required
gpl libs like the markdown javadoclet, and jtreg for developers, then we
aren't distributing them with the release, so not breaking any rules ;)
Cheers, Peter.
The other bits of documentation that came along with the JS I think
should still be converted to markdown because I don't think they're
really things that are going to need downloading and distributing
outside of the website.
Is that okay?
On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 10:07 AM, Tom Hobbs <[email protected]> wrote:
The "Release Notes" that come along with the Jini specs that I
recently put into staging, aren't (I think) "release notes" in the
traditional sense. At least not all of them. There's some real
nuggets of information in them that need to appear under a title other
than "Release notes".
With regards to what goes into our releases, the release notes as
generated out of Jira and anything else that we've been doing in the
past. The RNs as described above don't necessarily fit into that
criteria.
I don't know about markdown and javadocs, I do want to be able to host
the javadocs (automatically, as much as possible) on the website and
update them everytime we do a new release. The Jini Specs should have
absolute links in them to refer to the most up-to-date javadocs. We
can provide additional downloads for the javadocs (or include it in
the release download if we think that's necessary.) I'm not convinced
that the Jini Spec needs to be included in each release, although a
single downloadable package of the stuff would be nice.
Can we make it so that Hudson generates the Javadoc, and for a release
build, copies the Javadoc up into our website area? The Javadoc could
also be zipped and made available from the Downloads page. I don't
think that having the Javadoc in a different CSS/style thing to our
website is a big problem, in fact having non-matching Javadocs is
pretty common - from what I've seen elsewhere.
To summarise, my thoughts would be:
- Hudson to build the Javadoc from the source as normal HTML
- Hudson to copy the Javadoc HTML to somewhere that it can be served
by our website
- Hudson to create a ZIP of the Javadoc HTML ready for download
- Hudson to create the release containing binaries/source and release
notes and made ready for download from website
- Jini Specifications (and other documentation) to be in markdown
format on the website and contain absolute links to the most
up-to-date Javadocs
- Jini Specifications (and other documentation) to be taken from the
HTML site SVN, zipped and made available for download
On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 12:56 AM, Peter Firmstone <[email protected]> wrote:
The standards and release notes contain links to the build generated
javadoc, built from java source.
Is it possible to generate javadoc in the markdown format from the source
code? Or can markdown generate javadoc?
If we could, then we could pull the website from it's svn path, and pull the
standards, release notes and javadoc from river/trunk.
This looks interesting: http://code.google.com/p/markdown-doclet/
I think we currently access the javadoc from hudson builds for our website,
but this isn't suitable for our release. It would be nice if we could
satisfy the website and the release with one source, since this reduces
maintenance.
I'm not sure what the way forward is at the moment, it requires some more
thought.
Cheers,
Peter.
Sim IJskes - QCG wrote:
On 12/12/2010 12:12 PM, Peter Firmstone wrote:
Ok, sounds logical, when you checkout and build River, all the
documentation is build able from ant, which is then included in the
build that I release, so the copy we build for the website should also
be buildable from ant? Does this mean we need a new tool in our lib's to
build the docs?
Could be, yes. We could decide to include the docs in original markdown
format, or scrape them from the website, or convert them to html by
markdown. The only quick solutions that i see are include the original
mdtext files, or pull the converted mdtext files from the svn repo that
contains the website just before publishing (all html).
Gr. Sim
the chain is as follow for ASF CMS:
mdtext in svn
stage:
convert to html
store html in website repo
checkout to staging website
publish:
copy html in website repo to other repo dir
chechout to production website (all the mirrors)
