You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@batchee.apache.org by Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de> on 2016/01/06 15:20:29 UTC
generating site is broken
Hi!
I tried to re-run the site generation but it blurped at me.
I understand that we might run the JavaDoc from maven, but why do we publish the whole site with it? The site lifecycle is usually way different than the project release cycles. And it’s just much easier to use Apache CMS imo.
Any thoughts?
LieGrue,
strub
Re: generating site is broken
Posted by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>.
Can help next week when getting back a computer
Le 7 janv. 2016 09:13, "Mark Struberg" <st...@yahoo.de> a écrit :
> yes, we need to investigate.
> Would like to do that before sending out the ANNOUNCE mail finally ^^
>
> txs and LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
> > Am 06.01.2016 um 17:02 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau@gmail.com
> >:
> >
> > Only tested with 3.2.5 IIRC. Can be a plugin upgrade issue.
> > Le 6 janv. 2016 17:00, "Mark Struberg" <st...@yahoo.de> a écrit :
> >
> >> yes tried the scripts but blew up with a maven exception. weird doxis
> >> version mismatch it seems.
> >> Using mvn 3.3.3 and 3.3.5
> >>
> >> LieGrue,
> >> strub
> >>
> >>
> >>> Am 06.01.2016 um 15:58 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <
> rmannibucau@gmail.com
> >>> :
> >>>
> >>> Le 6 janv. 2016 15:55, "Mark Struberg" <st...@yahoo.de> a écrit :
> >>>>
> >>>> Having those 2 trunks is simply a reflection of the reality - the site
> >>> lifecycle and the project lifecycle are simply different.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> Let's not debate on it since it is true or false cause both work and
> both
> >>> have pro and cons depending if you priviledge dev phase or deployment
> >> one -
> >>> you guessed you priviledge the last one cause you are there and i do
> the
> >>> first cause i priviledge easiness of updates of the doc and consider
> >>> updates post releases are rare - at least for batchee.
> >>>
> >>>> It is currently not clear to me how to maintain the batchee site
> because
> >>> it seems to not work like the other projects I’m involved in.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> It does like most of site using cms though mvn plugin. Did you try the
> 2
> >>> cmds in the script without any param?
> >>>
> >>>> LieGrue,
> >>>> strub
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> Am 06.01.2016 um 15:38 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <
> >> rmannibucau@gmail.com
> >>>> :
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Far from a computer ATM but IIRC we use CMS - through the plugin
> >>>>>
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-batchee/blob/master/siteDeploy.sh
> >>> -and
> >>>>> IMO it is important to deploy WITH the release which doesnt prevent
> to
> >>> fic
> >>>>> the site manually using svn - already done few times.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Side note: if we can avoid to split site and project in 2 trunks like
> >>>>> sirona it is better and avoids to make it hard to deploy and easy to
> >> not
> >>>>> update IMO
> >>>>> Le 6 janv. 2016 15:20, "Mark Struberg" <st...@yahoo.de> a écrit :
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Hi!
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I tried to re-run the site generation but it blurped at me.
> >>>>>> I understand that we might run the JavaDoc from maven, but why do we
> >>>>>> publish the whole site with it? The site lifecycle is usually way
> >>> different
> >>>>>> than the project release cycles. And it’s just much easier to use
> >>> Apache
> >>>>>> CMS imo.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Any thoughts?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> LieGrue,
> >>>>>> strub
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> >>
>
>
Re: generating site is broken
Posted by Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de>.
yes, we need to investigate.
Would like to do that before sending out the ANNOUNCE mail finally ^^
txs and LieGrue,
strub
> Am 06.01.2016 um 17:02 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>:
>
> Only tested with 3.2.5 IIRC. Can be a plugin upgrade issue.
> Le 6 janv. 2016 17:00, "Mark Struberg" <st...@yahoo.de> a écrit :
>
>> yes tried the scripts but blew up with a maven exception. weird doxis
>> version mismatch it seems.
>> Using mvn 3.3.3 and 3.3.5
>>
>> LieGrue,
>> strub
>>
>>
>>> Am 06.01.2016 um 15:58 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau@gmail.com
>>> :
>>>
>>> Le 6 janv. 2016 15:55, "Mark Struberg" <st...@yahoo.de> a écrit :
>>>>
>>>> Having those 2 trunks is simply a reflection of the reality - the site
>>> lifecycle and the project lifecycle are simply different.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Let's not debate on it since it is true or false cause both work and both
>>> have pro and cons depending if you priviledge dev phase or deployment
>> one -
>>> you guessed you priviledge the last one cause you are there and i do the
>>> first cause i priviledge easiness of updates of the doc and consider
>>> updates post releases are rare - at least for batchee.
>>>
>>>> It is currently not clear to me how to maintain the batchee site because
>>> it seems to not work like the other projects I’m involved in.
>>>>
>>>
>>> It does like most of site using cms though mvn plugin. Did you try the 2
>>> cmds in the script without any param?
>>>
>>>> LieGrue,
>>>> strub
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Am 06.01.2016 um 15:38 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> rmannibucau@gmail.com
>>>> :
>>>>>
>>>>> Far from a computer ATM but IIRC we use CMS - through the plugin
>>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-batchee/blob/master/siteDeploy.sh
>>> -and
>>>>> IMO it is important to deploy WITH the release which doesnt prevent to
>>> fic
>>>>> the site manually using svn - already done few times.
>>>>>
>>>>> Side note: if we can avoid to split site and project in 2 trunks like
>>>>> sirona it is better and avoids to make it hard to deploy and easy to
>> not
>>>>> update IMO
>>>>> Le 6 janv. 2016 15:20, "Mark Struberg" <st...@yahoo.de> a écrit :
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I tried to re-run the site generation but it blurped at me.
>>>>>> I understand that we might run the JavaDoc from maven, but why do we
>>>>>> publish the whole site with it? The site lifecycle is usually way
>>> different
>>>>>> than the project release cycles. And it’s just much easier to use
>>> Apache
>>>>>> CMS imo.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Any thoughts?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> LieGrue,
>>>>>> strub
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
Re: generating site is broken
Posted by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>.
Only tested with 3.2.5 IIRC. Can be a plugin upgrade issue.
Le 6 janv. 2016 17:00, "Mark Struberg" <st...@yahoo.de> a écrit :
> yes tried the scripts but blew up with a maven exception. weird doxis
> version mismatch it seems.
> Using mvn 3.3.3 and 3.3.5
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
> > Am 06.01.2016 um 15:58 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau@gmail.com
> >:
> >
> > Le 6 janv. 2016 15:55, "Mark Struberg" <st...@yahoo.de> a écrit :
> >>
> >> Having those 2 trunks is simply a reflection of the reality - the site
> > lifecycle and the project lifecycle are simply different.
> >>
> >
> > Let's not debate on it since it is true or false cause both work and both
> > have pro and cons depending if you priviledge dev phase or deployment
> one -
> > you guessed you priviledge the last one cause you are there and i do the
> > first cause i priviledge easiness of updates of the doc and consider
> > updates post releases are rare - at least for batchee.
> >
> >> It is currently not clear to me how to maintain the batchee site because
> > it seems to not work like the other projects I’m involved in.
> >>
> >
> > It does like most of site using cms though mvn plugin. Did you try the 2
> > cmds in the script without any param?
> >
> >> LieGrue,
> >> strub
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>> Am 06.01.2016 um 15:38 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <
> rmannibucau@gmail.com
> >> :
> >>>
> >>> Far from a computer ATM but IIRC we use CMS - through the plugin
> >>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-batchee/blob/master/siteDeploy.sh
> > -and
> >>> IMO it is important to deploy WITH the release which doesnt prevent to
> > fic
> >>> the site manually using svn - already done few times.
> >>>
> >>> Side note: if we can avoid to split site and project in 2 trunks like
> >>> sirona it is better and avoids to make it hard to deploy and easy to
> not
> >>> update IMO
> >>> Le 6 janv. 2016 15:20, "Mark Struberg" <st...@yahoo.de> a écrit :
> >>>
> >>>> Hi!
> >>>>
> >>>> I tried to re-run the site generation but it blurped at me.
> >>>> I understand that we might run the JavaDoc from maven, but why do we
> >>>> publish the whole site with it? The site lifecycle is usually way
> > different
> >>>> than the project release cycles. And it’s just much easier to use
> > Apache
> >>>> CMS imo.
> >>>>
> >>>> Any thoughts?
> >>>>
> >>>> LieGrue,
> >>>> strub
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>
>
>
Re: generating site is broken
Posted by Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de>.
yes tried the scripts but blew up with a maven exception. weird doxis version mismatch it seems.
Using mvn 3.3.3 and 3.3.5
LieGrue,
strub
> Am 06.01.2016 um 15:58 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>:
>
> Le 6 janv. 2016 15:55, "Mark Struberg" <st...@yahoo.de> a écrit :
>>
>> Having those 2 trunks is simply a reflection of the reality - the site
> lifecycle and the project lifecycle are simply different.
>>
>
> Let's not debate on it since it is true or false cause both work and both
> have pro and cons depending if you priviledge dev phase or deployment one -
> you guessed you priviledge the last one cause you are there and i do the
> first cause i priviledge easiness of updates of the doc and consider
> updates post releases are rare - at least for batchee.
>
>> It is currently not clear to me how to maintain the batchee site because
> it seems to not work like the other projects I’m involved in.
>>
>
> It does like most of site using cms though mvn plugin. Did you try the 2
> cmds in the script without any param?
>
>> LieGrue,
>> strub
>>
>>
>>
>>> Am 06.01.2016 um 15:38 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau@gmail.com
>> :
>>>
>>> Far from a computer ATM but IIRC we use CMS - through the plugin
>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-batchee/blob/master/siteDeploy.sh
> -and
>>> IMO it is important to deploy WITH the release which doesnt prevent to
> fic
>>> the site manually using svn - already done few times.
>>>
>>> Side note: if we can avoid to split site and project in 2 trunks like
>>> sirona it is better and avoids to make it hard to deploy and easy to not
>>> update IMO
>>> Le 6 janv. 2016 15:20, "Mark Struberg" <st...@yahoo.de> a écrit :
>>>
>>>> Hi!
>>>>
>>>> I tried to re-run the site generation but it blurped at me.
>>>> I understand that we might run the JavaDoc from maven, but why do we
>>>> publish the whole site with it? The site lifecycle is usually way
> different
>>>> than the project release cycles. And it’s just much easier to use
> Apache
>>>> CMS imo.
>>>>
>>>> Any thoughts?
>>>>
>>>> LieGrue,
>>>> strub
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
Re: generating site is broken
Posted by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>.
Le 6 janv. 2016 15:55, "Mark Struberg" <st...@yahoo.de> a écrit :
>
> Having those 2 trunks is simply a reflection of the reality - the site
lifecycle and the project lifecycle are simply different.
>
Let's not debate on it since it is true or false cause both work and both
have pro and cons depending if you priviledge dev phase or deployment one -
you guessed you priviledge the last one cause you are there and i do the
first cause i priviledge easiness of updates of the doc and consider
updates post releases are rare - at least for batchee.
> It is currently not clear to me how to maintain the batchee site because
it seems to not work like the other projects I’m involved in.
>
It does like most of site using cms though mvn plugin. Did you try the 2
cmds in the script without any param?
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
>
> > Am 06.01.2016 um 15:38 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau@gmail.com
>:
> >
> > Far from a computer ATM but IIRC we use CMS - through the plugin
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-batchee/blob/master/siteDeploy.sh
-and
> > IMO it is important to deploy WITH the release which doesnt prevent to
fic
> > the site manually using svn - already done few times.
> >
> > Side note: if we can avoid to split site and project in 2 trunks like
> > sirona it is better and avoids to make it hard to deploy and easy to not
> > update IMO
> > Le 6 janv. 2016 15:20, "Mark Struberg" <st...@yahoo.de> a écrit :
> >
> >> Hi!
> >>
> >> I tried to re-run the site generation but it blurped at me.
> >> I understand that we might run the JavaDoc from maven, but why do we
> >> publish the whole site with it? The site lifecycle is usually way
different
> >> than the project release cycles. And it’s just much easier to use
Apache
> >> CMS imo.
> >>
> >> Any thoughts?
> >>
> >> LieGrue,
> >> strub
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
Re: generating site is broken
Posted by Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de>.
Having those 2 trunks is simply a reflection of the reality - the site lifecycle and the project lifecycle are simply different.
It is currently not clear to me how to maintain the batchee site because it seems to not work like the other projects I’m involved in.
LieGrue,
strub
> Am 06.01.2016 um 15:38 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>:
>
> Far from a computer ATM but IIRC we use CMS - through the plugin
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-batchee/blob/master/siteDeploy.sh -and
> IMO it is important to deploy WITH the release which doesnt prevent to fic
> the site manually using svn - already done few times.
>
> Side note: if we can avoid to split site and project in 2 trunks like
> sirona it is better and avoids to make it hard to deploy and easy to not
> update IMO
> Le 6 janv. 2016 15:20, "Mark Struberg" <st...@yahoo.de> a écrit :
>
>> Hi!
>>
>> I tried to re-run the site generation but it blurped at me.
>> I understand that we might run the JavaDoc from maven, but why do we
>> publish the whole site with it? The site lifecycle is usually way different
>> than the project release cycles. And it’s just much easier to use Apache
>> CMS imo.
>>
>> Any thoughts?
>>
>> LieGrue,
>> strub
>>
>>
>>
Re: generating site is broken
Posted by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>.
Far from a computer ATM but IIRC we use CMS - through the plugin
https://github.com/apache/incubator-batchee/blob/master/siteDeploy.sh -and
IMO it is important to deploy WITH the release which doesnt prevent to fic
the site manually using svn - already done few times.
Side note: if we can avoid to split site and project in 2 trunks like
sirona it is better and avoids to make it hard to deploy and easy to not
update IMO
Le 6 janv. 2016 15:20, "Mark Struberg" <st...@yahoo.de> a écrit :
> Hi!
>
> I tried to re-run the site generation but it blurped at me.
> I understand that we might run the JavaDoc from maven, but why do we
> publish the whole site with it? The site lifecycle is usually way different
> than the project release cycles. And it’s just much easier to use Apache
> CMS imo.
>
> Any thoughts?
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
>