Ken,
You bring up a lot of interesting things here, I¹ll try to reply below
(note: I¹m far from a documentation expert).
Well, I've been looking at a bunch of technologies that we can use to build
the documentation, but I'm not convinced that Maven will help us. Maven is an
interesting
Hi Mike,
Well, we have a few issues. I'm thinking about the big picture in that XML
some form of XSLT (or something else) is beneficial, but I also wanted to
stike a balance in that many people didn't want the bloated libraries to be
involved (or to be abstracted away from them if they were).
Hani Suleiman wrote:
I'm actually fairly strongly against maven. It's a huge project, and
almost all of the websites produced by it have a cookie cutter feel to
it. I also disagree with it being 'the way of the future'. It might be a
fashionable choice for many OSS projects, but so are a lot
Hani,
That's pretty much my opinion about Maven and Cocoon (minus all the
antagonism towards Jakarta and related OSS projects :P).
I want to build something simple, but I also want to have the flexibility to
do the 3 things we need: HTML (for local use), JSP (as currently being used)
and PDF.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
Ken Egervari [eXtremePHP]
Sent: 12. desember 2002 12:38
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [OS-webwork] Documentation
Hi Mike,
Well, we have a few issues. I'm thinking about the big picture
in
OK - let me reply to this one differently :)
As for Maven, producing a website is to me one of the minor features. It is
a fantastic build system, but I agree it is too 'rough' at the moment for
use on a project like WebWork.
I was merely suggesting xdoc as a format as it is simple, and does
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
Hani Suleiman
Sent: 12. desember 2002 12:52
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [OS-webwork] Documentation
I'm actually fairly strongly against maven. It's a huge project, and
almost all of the
Mike,
I agree with all the comments. I wanted to use xdoc as well (regardless of
the use of maven), the jars needed to build the docs (in this case, just
two: xalan and itext) and to build 2 html representations of the docs (one
for being sitemesh-aware while the other to be local).
So I think
Aslak,
You raise some good points. Referring to what I said earlier, it would be
worth using if all the developers if it was guarenteed that all the
contributors had installed on their machine.
I'm going to play with it a bit more with some sample xdoc files and see if
I can configure it to
Ken,
Just to clarify:
1) xdoc is good - it's simple and easy to use.
2) Adding 'bulk' to the build is fine, as long as it's still _simple_ to
build (ie downloading a JAR from CVS that's just 'used to build docs' is no
problem)
3) SiteMesh is used for the website presentation, not for the docs.
xbook looks like something else.
xdoc is a proprietary xml format invented by jakarta. it's kind of plain
xhtml with some extra tags (section, source...) to mark sections ans source
sections.
details are here:
http://jakarta.apache.org/site/jakarta-site-tags.html
i think there are only two
Hello,
Aslak Hellesøy wrote:
xbook looks like something else.
Yes.
xdoc is a proprietary xml format invented by jakarta. it's kind of plain
xhtml with some extra tags (section, source...) to mark sections ans source
sections.
details are here:
Maven currently uses DVSL (which is kind of Velocity++). You'll find the
code in Maven's xdoc plugin.
-But they're actually moving from DVSL to JSL. http://tinyurl.com/3gzw
Aslak
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
Bill Burton
Sent: 12.
FYI:
I won't bitch more about this now ;-)
Aslak
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 12. desember 2002 13:47
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [OpenSymphony-JIRA] Created: (WW-94) Maven Build
Message:
A new issue has been
Hello,
Aslak Hellesøy wrote:
Maven currently uses DVSL (which is kind of Velocity++). You'll find the
code in Maven's xdoc plugin.
-But they're actually moving from DVSL to JSL. http://tinyurl.com/3gzw
I assume you mean Jelly Stylesheet Library
Hello,
Mike Cannon-Brookes wrote:
Ken,
snip/
Personally I'd vote for xdocs without Maven at the moment, that gives us a
good upgrade path to Maven (if we decide to use it) or to any other XML
based doc format (as xdocs are XML files already).
Sure. However, why not check in the Maven
bit. I liked the xdoc format, however and was planning on using that
regardless.
Ken,
Not sure if we are going to use Maven (Mike likes it, Rickard doesn't, I
sorta-like-it-sorta-hate-it). I'm sure everyone else out there falls
somewhere in one of those three categories. BUT, since you're
17 matches
Mail list logo
