You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to docs@cocoon.apache.org by Steven Noels <st...@outerthought.org> on 2002/12/31 09:39:08 UTC
Out of which branch should the website be published?
Hm.
David was looking off-list into some issues with the website, and I was
trying to help.
Currently, I have a check-out of:
- cocoon_2_0_3 branch
- cocoon_2_0_4 branch
- HEAD
on my machine, but I fail to see how we can consistently decide which
branch (or HEAD) should go on the public website.
- news.xml of the HEAD branch contains relevant info
- some docs in the HEAD branch are not pertinent for the public
website (non-release-version docs)
- what about the 2_0_3/2_0_4 branch?
- 2_0_4 contains recent changes (at least from Sylvain)
- 2_0_3 has been the focal point of David's efforts lately
Maybe all this might become more clear if we
- isolate docs into their own CVS module (yes, I know this has been
suggested before - I believe the complexity and volume of Cocoon doco
warrants this, and requires some dedication to sort out where to commit
what)
- maintain a branch LIVE_WEBSITE over there?
</Steven>
--
Steven Noels http://outerthought.org/
Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center
Read my weblog at http://radio.weblogs.com/0103539/
stevenn at outerthought.org stevenn at apache.org
Re: Out of which branch should the website be published?
Posted by Jens Lorenz <je...@interface-projects.de>.
David Crossley wrote:
> Steven Noels wrote:
Hi,
>> - some docs in the HEAD branch are not pertinent for the public
>>website (non-release-version docs)
>
>
> No. We decided some time back not to maintain separate
> versions of docs but to just note at the top of the doc
> if it pertained to a certain branch.
>
>
>> - what about the 2_0_3/2_0_4 branch?
>> - 2_0_4 contains recent changes (at least from Sylvain)
>> - 2_0_3 has been the focal point of David's efforts lately
>
>
> As already discussed, there is only HEAD and
> release branch, though the latter should actually
> be called just "cocoon_2_0_branch".
>
>
>>Maybe all this might become more clear if we
>>
>> - isolate docs into their own CVS module (yes, I know this has been
>>suggested before - I believe the complexity and volume of Cocoon doco
>>warrants this, and requires some dedication to sort out where to commit
>>what)
>
>
> There is a big problem with people not also committing
> doc changes into the release branch (only head). Yes this
> is discouraging and a separate cvs module might help.
>
> Did we decide something in that previous discussion
> and did we look at the associated issues? I cannot
> find the original thread.
>
>
>> - maintain a branch LIVE_WEBSITE over there?
>
>
> How will that help? We already have problems with
> branch management.
>
Just a suggestion: I know that the Jakarta POI web site is automatically
generated (I assume from cvs). To know their solution might help with
creating a solution for the Cocoon web site.
Jens
--
Jens Lorenz
interface:projects GmbH \\|//
Tolkewitzer Strasse 49 (o o)
01277 Dresden ~~~~oOOo~(_)~oOOo~~~~
Germany
Re: Out of which branch should the website be published?
Posted by David Crossley <cr...@indexgeo.com.au>.
Steven Noels wrote:
<snip/>
> but I fail to see how we can consistently decide which
> branch (or HEAD) should go on the public website.
I have already noted this at issue #19 on the Wiki
http://wiki.cocoondev.org/Wiki.jsp?page=ForrestProposal
------
19. From which branch does the website get generated - head or
release branch?
READER COMMENTS
1. (dc) It is currently generated from the release branch.
Those xdocs are meant to be always in sync with the head of CVS.
The documentation does describe the head of CVS and we do not
maintain any separate "release" version of the docs (rather we
put notes in the documentation to indicate which branch applies).
So why do we not generate the website from the head of CVS?
The only reason that i can think of is that the "changes.html"
on the website describes the current release branch and not
all relevant changes to head have gone into release branch, so
the "changes" documents are necessarily different
------
> - news.xml of the HEAD branch contains relevant info
That should be in sync with the release branch.
> - some docs in the HEAD branch are not pertinent for the public
> website (non-release-version docs)
No. We decided some time back not to maintain separate
versions of docs but to just note at the top of the doc
if it pertained to a certain branch.
> - what about the 2_0_3/2_0_4 branch?
> - 2_0_4 contains recent changes (at least from Sylvain)
> - 2_0_3 has been the focal point of David's efforts lately
As already discussed, there is only HEAD and
release branch, though the latter should actually
be called just "cocoon_2_0_branch".
> Maybe all this might become more clear if we
>
> - isolate docs into their own CVS module (yes, I know this has been
> suggested before - I believe the complexity and volume of Cocoon doco
> warrants this, and requires some dedication to sort out where to commit
> what)
There is a big problem with people not also committing
doc changes into the release branch (only head). Yes this
is discouraging and a separate cvs module might help.
Did we decide something in that previous discussion
and did we look at the associated issues? I cannot
find the original thread.
> - maintain a branch LIVE_WEBSITE over there?
How will that help? We already have problems with
branch management.
--David
Re: Out of which branch should the website be published?
Posted by Steven Noels <st...@outerthought.org>.
Steven Noels wrote:
> Currently, I have a check-out of:
>
> - cocoon_2_0_3_branch
> - cocoon_2_0_4 tagged files (not a branch!)
^^^^^^
> - HEAD
>
> on my machine, but I fail to see how we can consistently decide which
> branch (or HEAD) should go on the public website.
>
> - news.xml of the HEAD branch contains relevant info
> - some docs in the HEAD branch are not pertinent for the public website
> (non-release-version docs)
> - what about the 2_0_3/2_0_4 branch?
> - 2_0_4 contains recent changes (at least from Sylvain)
wrong
> - 2_0_3 has been the focal point of David's efforts lately
no branch has been created after the 2.0.4 release
> Maybe all this might become more clear if we
>
> - isolate docs into their own CVS module (yes, I know this has been
> suggested before - I believe the complexity and volume of Cocoon doco
> warrants this, and requires some dedication to sort out where to commit
> what)
> - maintain a branch LIVE_WEBSITE over there?
>
> </Steven>
My bad,
</Steven>
--
Steven Noels http://outerthought.org/
Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center
Read my weblog at http://radio.weblogs.com/0103539/
stevenn at outerthought.org stevenn at apache.org