You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@commons.apache.org by Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> on 2013/11/06 16:53:03 UTC
Snapshot vs. release sites.
Hi All:
I find it unhelpful and confusing at times to see Commons sites for
-SNAPSHOT version.
I'd prefer to be able to browse a whole site for any released version. This
is especially handy when I want to find information for some older version
I must work with through an inherited dependency.
If I want to see reports on code coverage for older versions, for example,
I have to download and build. Old sites are also handy when they provide
browsable code and test code, useful when you are on your phone/tablet.
The confusion is worse when an a major release is upcoming and the snapshot
site is up instead of the previous maintenance release. There is usually no
way to tell what information is valid for previous releases instead of the
current release.
If I am lucky the site has a Javadoc link to the released version. Some
sites helpfully provide links to more than one Javadoc releases.
Just like we sometimes have links to previous Javadocs, I'd like to see
somewhere in the menu, a choice of versions to take me to older released
version of Commons sites.
Thoughts?
Gary
--
E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition<http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
Re: Snapshot vs. release sites.
Posted by Ralph Goers <ra...@gmail.com>.
Wouldn’t it be better to leverage Sonar for looking at versions of reports? Of course, that won’t get you the whole web site.
Ralph
On Nov 6, 2013, at 7:53 AM, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi All:
>
> I find it unhelpful and confusing at times to see Commons sites for
> -SNAPSHOT version.
>
> I'd prefer to be able to browse a whole site for any released version. This
> is especially handy when I want to find information for some older version
> I must work with through an inherited dependency.
>
> If I want to see reports on code coverage for older versions, for example,
> I have to download and build. Old sites are also handy when they provide
> browsable code and test code, useful when you are on your phone/tablet.
>
> The confusion is worse when an a major release is upcoming and the snapshot
> site is up instead of the previous maintenance release. There is usually no
> way to tell what information is valid for previous releases instead of the
> current release.
>
> If I am lucky the site has a Javadoc link to the released version. Some
> sites helpfully provide links to more than one Javadoc releases.
>
> Just like we sometimes have links to previous Javadocs, I'd like to see
> somewhere in the menu, a choice of versions to take me to older released
> version of Commons sites.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Gary
>
> --
> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition<http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
> Home: http://garygregory.com/
> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: Snapshot vs. release sites.
Posted by Thomas Neidhart <th...@gmail.com>.
On 11/06/2013 04:53 PM, Gary Gregory wrote:
> Hi All:
>
> I find it unhelpful and confusing at times to see Commons sites for
> -SNAPSHOT version.
>
> I'd prefer to be able to browse a whole site for any released version. This
> is especially handy when I want to find information for some older version
> I must work with through an inherited dependency.
>
> If I want to see reports on code coverage for older versions, for example,
> I have to download and build. Old sites are also handy when they provide
> browsable code and test code, useful when you are on your phone/tablet.
>
> The confusion is worse when an a major release is upcoming and the snapshot
> site is up instead of the previous maintenance release. There is usually no
> way to tell what information is valid for previous releases instead of the
> current release.
>
> If I am lucky the site has a Javadoc link to the released version. Some
> sites helpfully provide links to more than one Javadoc releases.
>
> Just like we sometimes have links to previous Javadocs, I'd like to see
> somewhere in the menu, a choice of versions to take me to older released
> version of Commons sites.
>
> Thoughts?
I like having snapshot versions as published site for the following reasons:
* able to update / correct the site during releases -> faster
* giving users quick feedback what is going on in trunk (changelog /
javadoc)
Prior to 1.1.2, commons-logging had also old released versions published
on the site, but it was quite a mess, as the links were mostly broken
and the navigation gets completely messed up once you browse to an old
release.
I think with our current site publishing tools this can only be done if
we do something similar as with the old javadocs versions, but I
question if it makes sense to look at old sites, the should be outdated
anyway.
Thomas
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: Snapshot vs. release sites.
Posted by Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 11:05 PM, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Hi All:
>
> I am going to try why I propose on [codec]. Stay tuned...
>
Check https://commons.apache.org/proper/commons-codec/
An alternative layout would be to do what http://bootstrapdocs.com/ does: a
simple top level page will links to all versions, including the current
one, and additionally for us the SNAPSHOT version.
Gary
>
> Gary
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 8:46 PM, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 12 November 2013 05:17, Henri Yandell <fl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 4:24 AM, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On 7 November 2013 17:45, Phil Steitz <ph...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> > On 11/6/13 10:11 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
>> >> >> On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 7:53 AM, Gary Gregory <
>> garydgregory@gmail.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >>> Hi All:
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> I find it unhelpful and confusing at times to see Commons sites for
>> >> >>> -SNAPSHOT version.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> I'd prefer to be able to browse a whole site for any released
>> version.
>> >> This
>> >> >>> is especially handy when I want to find information for some older
>> >> version
>> >> >>> I must work with through an inherited dependency.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >> The tail is wagging the dog (ie: Maven is leading us astray).
>> >>
>> >> This is nothing to do with Maven per se.
>> >> It's just a question of what source is used to build the website.
>> >>
>> >>
>> > There's the tail wagging us. Why is source (of the component) used to
>> build
>> > the website?
>>
>> I meant: which version of the source xdocs are used to build the site.
>>
>> It does not have to be trunk; it could be the tag or a branch (which
>> is what we do for JMeter).
>>
>> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >> The notion of a website having a version is absurd :) [other than
>> its
>> >> own
>> >> >> svn/git versioning]
>> >>
>> >> > +1 - I tend to agree with the site == head approach that we have
>> >> > pretty much always taken. I like the Tomcat approach of making
>> >> > versioned site content available for past releases, but that is a
>> >> > pain to maintain and I am loathe to ask more from Commons RMs atm or
>> >> > to clutter svn with ever more little maven-generated files. For
>> >> > most Commons components, there is not much beyond the javadoc
>> >> > anyway, which in most cases is already published for old releases.
>> >>
>> >> Forget about Commons for a moment.
>> >>
>> >> Consider Maven Plugin websites.
>> >>
>> >> Would they be useful if they only showed the documentation for the
>> >> unreleased head version of the plugin?
>> >>
>> >> No, of course not; it's essential the the user can readily find
>> >> documentation for the current release.
>> >> It would be nice if docs were also available for selected earlier
>> >> releases as well, but that is a separate issue.
>> >
>> >
>> > If we assume that users cannot manage documentation on their own, which
>> I
>> > think is fair, then it's essential the user can readily find the
>> > documentation for the release they are using.
>>
>> +1
>>
>> > I think every component's site should be akin to (assume lots of
>> > cross-referenced linking):
>> >
>> > index.html -> Boilerplate blurb. Latest release info.
>> > releases.html -> Info about every release.
>> > docs/** -> Docs for each release. ie) Javadoc + User Guide; though if we
>> > wanted to also bundle quality docs we could (but I think it's
>> pointless).
>> > download/** -> Download each release [obviously would be mirror
>> structure
>> > etc]
>>
>> That looks fine to me.
>>
>> > None of those have anything to do with versions of source.
>>
>> Huh?
>> At the very least the docs for each release should relate to the
>> source version for the release.
>>
>> > Hen
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition<http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
> Home: http://garygregory.com/
> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>
--
E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition<http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
Re: Snapshot vs. release sites.
Posted by Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>.
Hi All:
I am going to try why I propose on [codec]. Stay tuned...
Gary
On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 8:46 PM, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 12 November 2013 05:17, Henri Yandell <fl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 4:24 AM, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On 7 November 2013 17:45, Phil Steitz <ph...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > On 11/6/13 10:11 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
> >> >> On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 7:53 AM, Gary Gregory <garydgregory@gmail.com
> >
> >> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> Hi All:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I find it unhelpful and confusing at times to see Commons sites for
> >> >>> -SNAPSHOT version.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I'd prefer to be able to browse a whole site for any released
> version.
> >> This
> >> >>> is especially handy when I want to find information for some older
> >> version
> >> >>> I must work with through an inherited dependency.
> >> >>>
> >> >> The tail is wagging the dog (ie: Maven is leading us astray).
> >>
> >> This is nothing to do with Maven per se.
> >> It's just a question of what source is used to build the website.
> >>
> >>
> > There's the tail wagging us. Why is source (of the component) used to
> build
> > the website?
>
> I meant: which version of the source xdocs are used to build the site.
>
> It does not have to be trunk; it could be the tag or a branch (which
> is what we do for JMeter).
>
> >
> >> >>
> >> >> The notion of a website having a version is absurd :) [other than
> its
> >> own
> >> >> svn/git versioning]
> >>
> >> > +1 - I tend to agree with the site == head approach that we have
> >> > pretty much always taken. I like the Tomcat approach of making
> >> > versioned site content available for past releases, but that is a
> >> > pain to maintain and I am loathe to ask more from Commons RMs atm or
> >> > to clutter svn with ever more little maven-generated files. For
> >> > most Commons components, there is not much beyond the javadoc
> >> > anyway, which in most cases is already published for old releases.
> >>
> >> Forget about Commons for a moment.
> >>
> >> Consider Maven Plugin websites.
> >>
> >> Would they be useful if they only showed the documentation for the
> >> unreleased head version of the plugin?
> >>
> >> No, of course not; it's essential the the user can readily find
> >> documentation for the current release.
> >> It would be nice if docs were also available for selected earlier
> >> releases as well, but that is a separate issue.
> >
> >
> > If we assume that users cannot manage documentation on their own, which I
> > think is fair, then it's essential the user can readily find the
> > documentation for the release they are using.
>
> +1
>
> > I think every component's site should be akin to (assume lots of
> > cross-referenced linking):
> >
> > index.html -> Boilerplate blurb. Latest release info.
> > releases.html -> Info about every release.
> > docs/** -> Docs for each release. ie) Javadoc + User Guide; though if we
> > wanted to also bundle quality docs we could (but I think it's pointless).
> > download/** -> Download each release [obviously would be mirror structure
> > etc]
>
> That looks fine to me.
>
> > None of those have anything to do with versions of source.
>
> Huh?
> At the very least the docs for each release should relate to the
> source version for the release.
>
> > Hen
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>
--
E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition<http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
Re: Snapshot vs. release sites.
Posted by sebb <se...@gmail.com>.
On 12 November 2013 05:17, Henri Yandell <fl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 4:24 AM, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 7 November 2013 17:45, Phil Steitz <ph...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On 11/6/13 10:11 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
>> >> On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 7:53 AM, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Hi All:
>> >>>
>> >>> I find it unhelpful and confusing at times to see Commons sites for
>> >>> -SNAPSHOT version.
>> >>>
>> >>> I'd prefer to be able to browse a whole site for any released version.
>> This
>> >>> is especially handy when I want to find information for some older
>> version
>> >>> I must work with through an inherited dependency.
>> >>>
>> >> The tail is wagging the dog (ie: Maven is leading us astray).
>>
>> This is nothing to do with Maven per se.
>> It's just a question of what source is used to build the website.
>>
>>
> There's the tail wagging us. Why is source (of the component) used to build
> the website?
I meant: which version of the source xdocs are used to build the site.
It does not have to be trunk; it could be the tag or a branch (which
is what we do for JMeter).
>
>> >>
>> >> The notion of a website having a version is absurd :) [other than its
>> own
>> >> svn/git versioning]
>>
>> > +1 - I tend to agree with the site == head approach that we have
>> > pretty much always taken. I like the Tomcat approach of making
>> > versioned site content available for past releases, but that is a
>> > pain to maintain and I am loathe to ask more from Commons RMs atm or
>> > to clutter svn with ever more little maven-generated files. For
>> > most Commons components, there is not much beyond the javadoc
>> > anyway, which in most cases is already published for old releases.
>>
>> Forget about Commons for a moment.
>>
>> Consider Maven Plugin websites.
>>
>> Would they be useful if they only showed the documentation for the
>> unreleased head version of the plugin?
>>
>> No, of course not; it's essential the the user can readily find
>> documentation for the current release.
>> It would be nice if docs were also available for selected earlier
>> releases as well, but that is a separate issue.
>
>
> If we assume that users cannot manage documentation on their own, which I
> think is fair, then it's essential the user can readily find the
> documentation for the release they are using.
+1
> I think every component's site should be akin to (assume lots of
> cross-referenced linking):
>
> index.html -> Boilerplate blurb. Latest release info.
> releases.html -> Info about every release.
> docs/** -> Docs for each release. ie) Javadoc + User Guide; though if we
> wanted to also bundle quality docs we could (but I think it's pointless).
> download/** -> Download each release [obviously would be mirror structure
> etc]
That looks fine to me.
> None of those have anything to do with versions of source.
Huh?
At the very least the docs for each release should relate to the
source version for the release.
> Hen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: Snapshot vs. release sites.
Posted by Henri Yandell <fl...@gmail.com>.
On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 4:24 AM, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 7 November 2013 17:45, Phil Steitz <ph...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 11/6/13 10:11 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
> >> On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 7:53 AM, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi All:
> >>>
> >>> I find it unhelpful and confusing at times to see Commons sites for
> >>> -SNAPSHOT version.
> >>>
> >>> I'd prefer to be able to browse a whole site for any released version.
> This
> >>> is especially handy when I want to find information for some older
> version
> >>> I must work with through an inherited dependency.
> >>>
> >> The tail is wagging the dog (ie: Maven is leading us astray).
>
> This is nothing to do with Maven per se.
> It's just a question of what source is used to build the website.
>
>
There's the tail wagging us. Why is source (of the component) used to build
the website?
> >>
> >> The notion of a website having a version is absurd :) [other than its
> own
> >> svn/git versioning]
>
> > +1 - I tend to agree with the site == head approach that we have
> > pretty much always taken. I like the Tomcat approach of making
> > versioned site content available for past releases, but that is a
> > pain to maintain and I am loathe to ask more from Commons RMs atm or
> > to clutter svn with ever more little maven-generated files. For
> > most Commons components, there is not much beyond the javadoc
> > anyway, which in most cases is already published for old releases.
>
> Forget about Commons for a moment.
>
> Consider Maven Plugin websites.
>
> Would they be useful if they only showed the documentation for the
> unreleased head version of the plugin?
>
> No, of course not; it's essential the the user can readily find
> documentation for the current release.
> It would be nice if docs were also available for selected earlier
> releases as well, but that is a separate issue.
If we assume that users cannot manage documentation on their own, which I
think is fair, then it's essential the user can readily find the
documentation for the release they are using.
I think every component's site should be akin to (assume lots of
cross-referenced linking):
index.html -> Boilerplate blurb. Latest release info.
releases.html -> Info about every release.
docs/** -> Docs for each release. ie) Javadoc + User Guide; though if we
wanted to also bundle quality docs we could (but I think it's pointless).
download/** -> Download each release [obviously would be mirror structure
etc]
None of those have anything to do with versions of source.
Hen
Re: Snapshot vs. release sites.
Posted by sebb <se...@gmail.com>.
On 7 November 2013 17:45, Phil Steitz <ph...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 11/6/13 10:11 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 7:53 AM, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi All:
>>>
>>> I find it unhelpful and confusing at times to see Commons sites for
>>> -SNAPSHOT version.
>>>
>>> I'd prefer to be able to browse a whole site for any released version. This
>>> is especially handy when I want to find information for some older version
>>> I must work with through an inherited dependency.
>>>
>> The tail is wagging the dog (ie: Maven is leading us astray).
This is nothing to do with Maven per se.
It's just a question of what source is used to build the website.
>>
>> The notion of a website having a version is absurd :) [other than its own
>> svn/git versioning]
> +1 - I tend to agree with the site == head approach that we have
> pretty much always taken. I like the Tomcat approach of making
> versioned site content available for past releases, but that is a
> pain to maintain and I am loathe to ask more from Commons RMs atm or
> to clutter svn with ever more little maven-generated files. For
> most Commons components, there is not much beyond the javadoc
> anyway, which in most cases is already published for old releases.
Forget about Commons for a moment.
Consider Maven Plugin websites.
Would they be useful if they only showed the documentation for the
unreleased head version of the plugin?
No, of course not; it's essential the the user can readily find
documentation for the current release.
It would be nice if docs were also available for selected earlier
releases as well, but that is a separate issue.
> Phil
>>
>> Hen
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: Snapshot vs. release sites.
Posted by Phil Steitz <ph...@gmail.com>.
On 11/6/13 10:11 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 7:53 AM, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi All:
>>
>> I find it unhelpful and confusing at times to see Commons sites for
>> -SNAPSHOT version.
>>
>> I'd prefer to be able to browse a whole site for any released version. This
>> is especially handy when I want to find information for some older version
>> I must work with through an inherited dependency.
>>
> The tail is wagging the dog (ie: Maven is leading us astray).
>
> The notion of a website having a version is absurd :) [other than its own
> svn/git versioning]
+1 - I tend to agree with the site == head approach that we have
pretty much always taken. I like the Tomcat approach of making
versioned site content available for past releases, but that is a
pain to maintain and I am loathe to ask more from Commons RMs atm or
to clutter svn with ever more little maven-generated files. For
most Commons components, there is not much beyond the javadoc
anyway, which in most cases is already published for old releases.
Phil
>
> Hen
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: Snapshot vs. release sites.
Posted by Henri Yandell <fl...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 7:53 AM, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi All:
>
> I find it unhelpful and confusing at times to see Commons sites for
> -SNAPSHOT version.
>
> I'd prefer to be able to browse a whole site for any released version. This
> is especially handy when I want to find information for some older version
> I must work with through an inherited dependency.
>
The tail is wagging the dog (ie: Maven is leading us astray).
The notion of a website having a version is absurd :) [other than its own
svn/git versioning]
Hen
Re: Snapshot vs. release sites.
Posted by Stefan Bodewig <bo...@apache.org>.
On 2013-11-07, sebb wrote:
> On 6 November 2013 15:53, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi All:
>> I find it unhelpful and confusing at times to see Commons sites for
>> -SNAPSHOT version.
> +1, it's annoying and unhelpful to have the main site refer to a
> version that has not been released.
I tend to disagree. As long as the site says what to expect from which
version, things should be fine. A site telling users what to expect
from an upcoming version may lead to more contribution/testing. I think
this happened when the Compress site contained information about 7z
support before we released it for example.
Stefan
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: Snapshot vs. release sites.
Posted by sebb <se...@gmail.com>.
On 6 November 2013 15:53, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi All:
>
> I find it unhelpful and confusing at times to see Commons sites for
> -SNAPSHOT version.
+1, it's annoying and unhelpful to have the main site refer to a
version that has not been released.
> I'd prefer to be able to browse a whole site for any released version. This
> is especially handy when I want to find information for some older version
> I must work with through an inherited dependency.
>
> If I want to see reports on code coverage for older versions, for example,
> I have to download and build. Old sites are also handy when they provide
> browsable code and test code, useful when you are on your phone/tablet.
>
> The confusion is worse when an a major release is upcoming and the snapshot
> site is up instead of the previous maintenance release. There is usually no
> way to tell what information is valid for previous releases instead of the
> current release.
>
> If I am lucky the site has a Javadoc link to the released version. Some
> sites helpfully provide links to more than one Javadoc releases.
>
> Just like we sometimes have links to previous Javadocs, I'd like to see
> somewhere in the menu, a choice of versions to take me to older released
> version of Commons sites.
>
> Thoughts?
It depends a bit on the component whether older versions of the sites
are useful.
Older versions of sites are sometimes not very accurate; just as there
are bugs in code, the documentation has bugs as well.
The code cross-reference and Javadoc might be sufficient in many cases.
> Gary
>
> --
> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition<http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
> Home: http://garygregory.com/
> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org