Re: jakarta-site2
Jon Stevens wrote:
now, if i can get some help with the encoding problem,
that would be nice...
===
RCS file: /home/cvs/jakarta-site2/xdocs/site/whoweare.xml,v
retrieving revision 1.25
diff -u -r1.25 whoweare.xml
--- whoweare.xml2001/03/15 06:25:59 1.25
+++ whoweare.xml2001/03/15 09:28:09
@@ -213,10 +214,7 @@
/p
p
-!-- temporary disabled until encoding issues can be figured out
-bCeki G#252;lc#252;/b (ceki at apache.org)
---
-bCeki Gulcu/b (ceki at apache.org)
+b![CDATA[Ceki Guuml;lcuuml;]]/b (ceki at apache.org)
br/
Ceki is the founder of the log4j project. Time permitting, he also does
custom development for clients. See a
===
RCS file:
/home/cvs/jakarta-velocity/src/java/org/apache/velocity/anakia/OutputWrapper.java,v
retrieving revision 1.2
diff -u -r1.2 OutputWrapper.java
--- OutputWrapper.java 2001/03/15 04:02:35 1.2
+++ OutputWrapper.java 2001/03/15 09:29:42
@@ -59,6 +59,7 @@
import org.jdom.Element;
import org.jdom.output.XMLOutputter;
+import org.jdom.CDATA;
/**
* This class extends XMLOutputter in order to provide
@@ -102,4 +103,14 @@
}
return buff.toString();
}
+
+/**
+ * Passthru CDATA content uninterpreted
+ */
+protected void printCDATASection(CDATA cdata, java.io.Writer out,
+ int indentLevel) throws IOException
+{
+out.write(cdata.getText());
+}
+
}
- Sam Ruby
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: encoding problems with Jakarta-site
At 22:12 14.03.2001 -0800, Jon Stevens wrote:
Ok,
I think this encoding stuff with Ceki's name is a bug in the OSX JVM that
I'm using, so we may have to revert back to using "u" for a bit until the
OSX GM is out and I can test/use that. :-( The weird thing is that I'm not
convinced that it is the OSX JVM though...here is why:
Here is the input file:
p
bCeki G#252;lc#252;/b (ceki at apache.org)
br/
Ceki is the founder of the log4j project. Time permitting, he also does
custom development for clients. See a
href="http://www.qos.ch"www.qos.ch/a for more info.
/p
Here is the little test program:
import java.io.*;
import java.lang.*;
import java.util.*;
import org.jdom.*;
import org.jdom.input.*;
import org.jdom.output.*;
public class Test
{
public static void main (String[] args)
{
try
{
Document d = new SAXBuilder().build(args[0]);
XMLOutputter outp = new XMLOutputter("", false);
outp.setEncoding("ISO-8859-1");
FileWriter fw = new FileWriter("test.html");
outp.output(d, fw);
fw.close();
}
catch (Exception e)
{
}
}
}
java Test input.txt
produces:
?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?
p
bCeki Glc/b (ceki at apache.org)
br /
Ceki is the founder of the
log4j project. Time permitting, he also does
custom development for clients.
See a href="http://www.qos.ch"www.qos.ch/a for more info.
/p
As you can see, Ceki's name is correctly shown. The weird thing is that if I
take the file and load it in my browser, the weird characters show up for
the "u"'s, not the correct ones...
Can you send file produced by "java Test input.txt "
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: jakarta-site2
Done and done.
(this was my first site update, so if someone would give it a look-see
to make sure all is well, I would be much obliged...)
geir
Sam Ruby wrote:
Jon Stevens wrote:
now, if i can get some help with the encoding problem,
that would be nice...
===
RCS file: /home/cvs/jakarta-site2/xdocs/site/whoweare.xml,v
retrieving revision 1.25
diff -u -r1.25 whoweare.xml
--- whoweare.xml2001/03/15 06:25:59 1.25
+++ whoweare.xml2001/03/15 09:28:09
@@ -213,10 +214,7 @@
/p
p
-!-- temporary disabled until encoding issues can be figured out
-bCeki G#252;lc#252;/b (ceki at apache.org)
---
-bCeki Gulcu/b (ceki at apache.org)
+b![CDATA[Ceki Guuml;lcuuml;]]/b (ceki at apache.org)
br/
Ceki is the founder of the log4j project. Time permitting, he also does
custom development for clients. See a
===
RCS file:
/home/cvs/jakarta-velocity/src/java/org/apache/velocity/anakia/OutputWrapper.java,v
retrieving revision 1.2
diff -u -r1.2 OutputWrapper.java
--- OutputWrapper.java 2001/03/15 04:02:35 1.2
+++ OutputWrapper.java 2001/03/15 09:29:42
@@ -59,6 +59,7 @@
import org.jdom.Element;
import org.jdom.output.XMLOutputter;
+import org.jdom.CDATA;
/**
* This class extends XMLOutputter in order to provide
@@ -102,4 +103,14 @@
}
return buff.toString();
}
+
+/**
+ * Passthru CDATA content uninterpreted
+ */
+protected void printCDATASection(CDATA cdata, java.io.Writer out,
+ int indentLevel) throws IOException
+{
+out.write(cdata.getText());
+}
+
}
- Sam Ruby
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Developing for the web? See http://jakarta.apache.org/velocity/
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Directory layout feedback
Conor, At 11:02 15.03.2001 +1100, Conor MacNeill wrote: Ceki, I would like to give you some feedback on the common directory layout http://jakarta.apache.org/site/dirlayout.html This is mostly from my Ant perspective and somewhat from my impression of some other common practices in the Jakarta sub-projects. I do realize that these are just recommendations. docs directory = I have noticed a trend to put the sub-project's web pages into this area. I wonder is that is a good thing since the web pages and the user documentation are two different things, IMHO. The web pages are potentially much more ephemeral than the product documentation that accompanies a release. When you build a release, it may not make much sense to include that ephemeral information (such as sub-project news) with the project docs. For Ant, I made a separate directory for the webpages (webpage). I had to do this anyway since there was already an index.html file in the Ant docs directory, although I have subsequently moved that. As Jon pointed out earlier, I do not see the advantage for distinguishing between documentation and the web pages. It is quite pleasant to be able to browse a project web site locally on a file system without requiring a network connection. build directory Many of the Jakarta projects put the build files in the project's root directory and use the build directory for build results, such as build classes which will be jarred up into the distribution So by build/ you actually mean the dist/ directory of the dirlayout.html document. As far as I can see there is nothing wrong with that except that if we make a choice regardless of what it is we should stick to it, a bit like indentation I guess. build/lib == If this is a non-binding recommendation, I don't see why it supports two locations to put the binary jars. It should either be lib or build/lib, IMHO. Jon, explained that the build/lib is for building (compiling) and lib/ for runtime. I confess that I don't really understand the difference... See also the last paragraph of this note. dist = I believe this should be a distribution "image" and it is therefore not really appropriate to place the distribution binaries (.zip, .gz files) in this location. For Ant, I create the distributions into a directory called distribution. It contains the source and binary distributions, the latter being equivalent to the dist directory. Why are you making a distinction? What's wrong putting the distribution images, src, birnary, documentation or otherwise in dist/ and the javac generated classes under dist/classes? dist/classes = I don't believe we want generally want raw classfiles in the dist directory. Many projects put this into build/classes and place just jars in the dist directory. Why? What's the rationale? Moreover, in the classes directory there might be more classes than in the jars. Other == I think that there should be a recommendation that any file/dir not under CVS control should go into the .cvsignore file. There is no need to adding any files to .cvsignore if you add files to CVS control individually as in cvs add x.java y.java instead of cvs add * or am I missing something? Do we want to make recommendations about the structure of the dist directory? This is what end-users will actually use and there may be benefits in a common approach here too. In Ant, for example, we create a dist/bin directory to contain scripts and executables useful for running Ant. we also place all generated jars in the dist/lib directory. Perhaps they are similar or the same as these recommendations. Restricting the dist/ directory to the binaries that the end-users will actually use is a nice abstraction imho. How about: dist/lib for generated jar files and extraneous libs dist/bin/ for scripts (generated or not) dist/image for actual project distributions (tar.gz or zip files) The project distribution files are for those that actually make releases not for the casual user Jon Doe. As I understand it, there will be build/lib for libraries used only during build and not during runtime, and dist/lib for libraries used in both build time or run time. (dist/lib is perhaps what Jon meant by lib/) Is that reasonable? Cheers, Ceki - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Directory layout feedback
Ceki Glc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 11:02 15.03.2001 +1100, Conor MacNeill wrote: I think that there should be a recommendation that any file/dir not under CVS control should go into the .cvsignore file. There is no need to adding any files to .cvsignore if you add files to CVS control individually as in cvs add x.java y.java instead of cvs add * or am I missing something? yes, the annoying ? dist in cvs update -d -P Stefan - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Directory layout feedback
At 01:34 16.03.2001 +1100, Peter Donald wrote: build directory Many of the Jakarta projects put the build files in the project's root directory and use the build directory for build results, such as build classes which will be jarred up into the distribution So by build/ you actually mean the dist/ directory of the dirlayout.html document. As far as I can see there is nothing wrong with that except that if we make a choice regardless of what it is we should stick to it, a bit like indentation I guess. Gonna have to disagree. You do whats best when there is no significant advantage of doing it otherways. Standardizing on a crap standard because someone decrees it a standard is near lunacy. Sure, no one is suggesting that we standardize on jolt/ for jar files. :-) A lot of projects use dist/, in my personal projects I use out/ while some projects use bin/. See, these names are like colors, blue, green, or yellow... At face value, they are all equivalent. That's what I meant by sticking to a name. It goes without saying that the chosen color has to be reasonable, unlike #A26F58 or SemiHuedVelvetBlue. Jon, explained that the build/lib is for building (compiling) and lib/ for runtime. I confess that I don't really understand the difference... See also the last paragraph of this note. Other projects use tools/lib/* for build/lib. This is where the jars are stored for tools that run during build process. None of the jars are included in compiling classpath or in final distribution. dist = I believe this should be a distribution "image" and it is therefore not really appropriate to place the distribution binaries (.zip, .gz files) in this location. For Ant, I create the distributions into a directory called distribution. It contains the source and binary distributions, the latter being equivalent to the dist directory. Why are you making a distinction? What's wrong putting the distribution images, src, birnary, documentation or otherwise in dist/ and the javac generated classes under dist/classes? Some projects actually want to run from dist target. So the dist target should be identical to the one that is included in binary distributions. In theory you should be able to go cd dist/bin run.sh Sure. dist/classes = I don't believe we want generally want raw classfiles in the dist directory. Many projects put this into build/classes and place just jars in the dist directory. Why? What's the rationale? Moreover, in the classes directory there might be more classes than in the jars. Because dist is an image of binary distribution and it is very rare that raw class files are included in binary distribution (and if they are the developers should be shot). Forgive my ignorance but what is so wrong with putting "raw" class files in the distrib along jar files? Is it the wasted disk space? How about: dist/lib for generated jar files and extraneous libs dist/bin/ for scripts (generated or not) dist/image for actual project distributions (tar.gz or zip files) You don't get what is being said. The dist directory is unzipped version of binary distribution. So that would be liking distributing Log4j-1.0.zip that contained image/Log4j-1.0.zip inside it. That is why it is good to make distinction and place distributions in another directory (ie distributions). I am not aware of the assumption that the dist directory is meant the unzipped version of the binary distribution. Not at all. If the files xdocs/manual.xml build/build.xml build/build.sh build/build.bat build/lib/ant.jar build/lib/xerces.jar src/x.java are contained in the CVS module for project X, then after compiling, generating javadocs, jarring, and building a distribution image, one would get: docs/manual.html docs/api/ docs/api/x.html docs/api/overview.html docs/api/index.html docs/api/etc... build/build.xml build/build.sh build/build.bat build/lib/ant.jar build/lib/xerces.jar src/x.java xdocs/manual.xml dist/classes/x.class dist/lib/X.jar dist/images/X.tar.gz dist/images/X.zip where X.tar.gz and X.zip contain all the above files other than themselves. The images can be refined to contain only source code, documentation, or binaries. Does that make sense? Ceki - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Directory layout feedback
At 02:46 16.03.2001 +1100, Peter Donald wrote: At 04:17 15/3/01 +0100, Ceki Glc wrote: A lot of projects use dist/, in my personal projects I use out/ while some projects use bin/. See, these names are like colors, blue, green, or yellow... At face value, they are all equivalent. That's what I meant by sticking to a name. It goes without saying that the chosen color has to be reasonable, unlike #A26F58 or SemiHuedVelvetBlue. True but we tend to have some ... err .. strong willed individuals here who we will find difficult to move from their pet structure. You can make a standard all you want but we have to get people to follow it ;) I hear you. Forgive my ignorance but what is so wrong with putting "raw" class files in the distrib along jar files? Is it the wasted disk space? messy classpath, wasted diskspace, incredibly slow access on certain filesystems (ie FAT) etc. Also much more likely to break the 100 char limit in tar files etc. One is free to use jar files, using the class/ dir is an option. The tar char limit is broken by a class file then it is likely to be broken by that file's javadoc equivalent as well. How serious is this tar limitation anyway? I am not aware of the assumption that the dist directory is meant the unzipped version of the binary distribution. Not at all. well theres the rub. If the files xdocs/manual.xml build/build.xml build/build.sh build/build.bat build/lib/ant.jar build/lib/xerces.jar src/x.java are contained in the CVS module for project X, then after compiling, generating javadocs, jarring, and building a distribution image, one would get: docs/manual.html docs/api/ docs/api/x.html docs/api/overview.html docs/api/index.html docs/api/etc... build/build.xml build/build.sh build/build.bat build/lib/ant.jar build/lib/xerces.jar src/x.java xdocs/manual.xml dist/classes/x.class dist/lib/X.jar dist/images/X.tar.gz dist/images/X.zip Maybe in *your* model ... Yes, that's the model log4j uses although I am adapting the log4j directory structure to match the dirlayout document and this ongoing discussion. where X.tar.gz and X.zip contain all the above files other than themselves. The images can be refined to contain only source code, documentation, or binaries. Does that make sense? Ceki It's one way of doing it but it requires developer sentience whilst building distributions - something I try to avoid at all costs ;) Besides that model only works for certain types of projects. Some projects build particular types of images etc. Having everything below dist/* in binary distribution is much easier and is a common practice that I believe originated in java.apace.org projects and migrated to jakarta/xml groups. OK but I don't see any big difference between the two approaches. In one you generate into dist/ + copy into dist/ and the other you tar/zip a set of files specified in a tar/zip target. You have to be sentient in both cases or? Ceki - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: session question
This is not the list for that question - try tomcat-users Cheers, Pete *-* | "Faced with the choice between changing one's mind, | | and proving that there is no need to do so - almost | | everyone gets busy on the proof." | | - John Kenneth Galbraith | *-* - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
