You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@struts.apache.org by James Mitchell <jm...@apache.org> on 2003/10/02 06:58:29 UTC
[Vote] Choosing a build/doc gen tool(s) [was: Re: The Forrest Option]
Most of us have given (or at least hinted at) our opinions, so let's give a
show of hands:
Mavenization:
[X] +1 - I am in favor of using Maven for build/dist/test/etc.
[ ] +0 - I agree, but cannot help at this time.
[ ] -0 - I don't agree, but not enough to give a -1.
[ ] -1 - I am not in favor of using Maven for build/dist/test/etc.
Forrestization:
[X] +1 - I am in favor of using Forrest for site generation.
[ ] +0 - I agree, but cannot help at this time.
[ ] -0 - I don't agree, but not enough to give a -1.
[ ] -1 - I am not in favor of using Forrest for site generation.
Other:
[X] - I would like to pursue the Maven-with-Forrest-as-a-plugin idea.
(If I left out any, please add them)
One question I have about all this, (and please forgive me if I missed it in
any of the messages in this thread) how does using either approach affect
the generation of the .tld from our source?
--
James Mitchell
Software Engineer / Struts Evangelist
http://www.struts-atlanta.org
678.910.8017
770.822.3359
AIM:jmitchtx
----- Original Message -----
From: "Don Brown" <mr...@twdata.org>
To: "Struts Developers List" <st...@jakarta.apache.org>
Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2003 7:18 PM
Subject: Re: The Forrest Option
> On Wed, 1 Oct 2003, Craig R. McClanahan wrote:
> <snip />
> > <ducks>
> > We can even add Forrest-based generation to our current Ant-based build
> > scripts :-). It's just an external tool, after all.
> > </ducks>
>
> Actually it is very easy to do, using a forrest entity which imports
> forrest targets. The only setup needed is to install forrest and set
> FORREST_HOME. All the same ant targets used now to build the site can be
> used to build forrest. If the Forrest route was accepted, I planned to do
> this from the start.
>
> Don
>
> >
> > >There's only so much time we each have to spend on Struts. I'd rather
not
> > >spend much time learning the build process.
> > >
> > >David
> > >
> > >
> > Craig
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: struts-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: struts-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
> >
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: struts-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: struts-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: struts-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: struts-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: [Vote] Choosing a build/doc gen tool(s) [was: Re: The Forrest
Option]
Posted by Don Brown <mr...@twdata.org>.
It might be broken, but then again, we aren't using Maven today anyways.
I asked him about it, and he said last he heard it was working, some
people reported it buggy, but since no one was using it, it was staying
in jira until someone could put time into it. If we moved to Forrest, I
would certainly put time in fixing it and getting it added to Maven's
repository.
Don
On Thu, 2 Oct 2003, Robert Leland wrote:
> James Mitchell wrote:
>
> I thought that one of the Forrest Committters said that the Forrest
> plug-in for Maven
> is most likely broken ?
>
> >Most of us have given (or at least hinted at) our opinions, so let's give a
> >show of hands:
> >
> >Mavenization:
> >[X] +1 - I am in favor of using Maven for build/dist/test/etc.
> >[ ] +0 - I agree, but cannot help at this time.
> >[ ] -0 - I don't agree, but not enough to give a -1.
> >[ ] -1 - I am not in favor of using Maven for build/dist/test/etc.
> >
> >Forrestization:
> >[X] +1 - I am in favor of using Forrest for site generation.
> >[ ] +0 - I agree, but cannot help at this time.
> >[ ] -0 - I don't agree, but not enough to give a -1.
> >[ ] -1 - I am not in favor of using Forrest for site generation.
> >
> >Other:
> >[X] - I would like to pursue the Maven-with-Forrest-as-a-plugin idea.
> >
> >
> >(If I left out any, please add them)
> >
> >
> >
> >One question I have about all this, (and please forgive me if I missed it in
> >any of the messages in this thread) how does using either approach affect
> >the generation of the .tld from our source?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >--
> >James Mitchell
> >Software Engineer / Struts Evangelist
> >http://www.struts-atlanta.org
> >678.910.8017
> >770.822.3359
> >AIM:jmitchtx
> >
> >
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Don Brown" <mr...@twdata.org>
> >To: "Struts Developers List" <st...@jakarta.apache.org>
> >Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2003 7:18 PM
> >Subject: Re: The Forrest Option
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>On Wed, 1 Oct 2003, Craig R. McClanahan wrote:
> >><snip />
> >>
> >>
> >>><ducks>
> >>>We can even add Forrest-based generation to our current Ant-based build
> >>>scripts :-). It's just an external tool, after all.
> >>></ducks>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>Actually it is very easy to do, using a forrest entity which imports
> >>forrest targets. The only setup needed is to install forrest and set
> >>FORREST_HOME. All the same ant targets used now to build the site can be
> >>used to build forrest. If the Forrest route was accepted, I planned to do
> >>this from the start.
> >>
> >>Don
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>>There's only so much time we each have to spend on Struts. I'd rather
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >not
> >
> >
> >>>>spend much time learning the build process.
> >>>>
> >>>>David
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>Craig
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>To unsubscribe, e-mail: struts-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> >>>For additional commands, e-mail: struts-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>To unsubscribe, e-mail: struts-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> >>For additional commands, e-mail: struts-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >To unsubscribe, e-mail: struts-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> >For additional commands, e-mail: struts-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: struts-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: struts-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: struts-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: struts-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: [Vote] Choosing a build/doc gen tool(s) [was: Re: The Forrest
Option]
Posted by Robert Leland <rl...@apache.org>.
James Mitchell wrote:
I thought that one of the Forrest Committters said that the Forrest
plug-in for Maven
is most likely broken ?
>Most of us have given (or at least hinted at) our opinions, so let's give a
>show of hands:
>
>Mavenization:
>[X] +1 - I am in favor of using Maven for build/dist/test/etc.
>[ ] +0 - I agree, but cannot help at this time.
>[ ] -0 - I don't agree, but not enough to give a -1.
>[ ] -1 - I am not in favor of using Maven for build/dist/test/etc.
>
>Forrestization:
>[X] +1 - I am in favor of using Forrest for site generation.
>[ ] +0 - I agree, but cannot help at this time.
>[ ] -0 - I don't agree, but not enough to give a -1.
>[ ] -1 - I am not in favor of using Forrest for site generation.
>
>Other:
>[X] - I would like to pursue the Maven-with-Forrest-as-a-plugin idea.
>
>
>(If I left out any, please add them)
>
>
>
>One question I have about all this, (and please forgive me if I missed it in
>any of the messages in this thread) how does using either approach affect
>the generation of the .tld from our source?
>
>
>
>
>--
>James Mitchell
>Software Engineer / Struts Evangelist
>http://www.struts-atlanta.org
>678.910.8017
>770.822.3359
>AIM:jmitchtx
>
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Don Brown" <mr...@twdata.org>
>To: "Struts Developers List" <st...@jakarta.apache.org>
>Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2003 7:18 PM
>Subject: Re: The Forrest Option
>
>
>
>
>>On Wed, 1 Oct 2003, Craig R. McClanahan wrote:
>><snip />
>>
>>
>>><ducks>
>>>We can even add Forrest-based generation to our current Ant-based build
>>>scripts :-). It's just an external tool, after all.
>>></ducks>
>>>
>>>
>>Actually it is very easy to do, using a forrest entity which imports
>>forrest targets. The only setup needed is to install forrest and set
>>FORREST_HOME. All the same ant targets used now to build the site can be
>>used to build forrest. If the Forrest route was accepted, I planned to do
>>this from the start.
>>
>>Don
>>
>>
>>
>>>>There's only so much time we each have to spend on Struts. I'd rather
>>>>
>>>>
>not
>
>
>>>>spend much time learning the build process.
>>>>
>>>>David
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>Craig
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>To unsubscribe, e-mail: struts-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
>>>For additional commands, e-mail: struts-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>To unsubscribe, e-mail: struts-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
>>For additional commands, e-mail: struts-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>>
>>
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: struts-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: struts-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
>
>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: struts-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: struts-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: [Vote] Choosing a build/doc gen tool(s) [was: Re: The Forrest
Option]
Posted by Don Brown <mr...@twdata.org>.
I believe the question is not between maven and forrest, but rather
between Anakia/xdoc and forrest. It is entirely possible to even use all
the report output from Maven and include it in a forrest build of the
website. Default Maven uses the xdoc plugin. All forrest would be doing
is replacing it with the Forrst plugin. You would still be able to get
all the Maven-generated content.
Forrest is not a built tool. It only replaces xdoc whether we keep Ant or
go to Maven.
Could this vote not be redone?
Mavenization with xdoc plugin:
[ ] +1 - I am in favor of using Maven and the xdoc plugin
[ ] +0 - I agree, but cannot help at this time.
[ ] -0 - I don't agree, but not enough to give a -1.
[ ] -1 - I am not in favor of using the xdoc plugin
Mavenization with the Forrest plugin:
[ ] +1 - I am in favor of using Forrest instead of xdoc.
[ ] +0 - I agree, but cannot help at this time.
[ ] -0 - I don't agree, but not enough to give a -1.
[ ] -1 - I am not in favor of using Forrest instead of xdoc.
I'm assuming a move to Maven is inevitable?
Don
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: struts-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: struts-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: [Vote] Choosing a build/doc gen tool(s) [was: Re: The Forrest
Option]
Posted by Robert Leland <rl...@apache.org>.
Steve Raeburn wrote:
>Well Rob has already made a start on adding Maven. I did try building with
>it, but hit a snag downloading the validator jar and I've not had a chance
>to have another look since.
>
>
Typically, an request is posted on the developers list requestiong that
a jar be uploaded to
their repository. I'll do that now.
I would like ot see Maven all the way but since this isn't part of core
Struts then I feel I don't
have a real right to vote -1, it's not life or death.
I agree if Don wants to 'roll' their sleeves up and do Forrest then Ok.
If someone want's to roll their sleeves up and do maven than that's good
also.
My guess is that putting the struts docs in Maven/Forrest would take
about the same amount of time.
Menu entries are placed in the navigation.xml file and it flows down
from there.
It could be as easy as copying all the .xml files from doc -> xdoc,
though I believe the
XML element names might have to change.
As far as stability, Maven is very stable. I had been running off the
CVS HEAD for a while.
I believe they are going to come out with RC2 in the next few weeks,
they were talking about this
weekend, but nothing ever happens that quickly. Of course the project
leader Jason is back from
an extended leave so who knows.
Again if there are no Volunteers stepping up for Maven and Don wants to
mover over to Forrest
then +1.
-Rob
>I wouldn't have a problem with releasing based on a Maven RC because it's
>not a run-time dependency. Having said that I would consider our use of
>Maven to be experimental for a while, until we get more familiar with it,
>and run it in parallel with the current Ant build. I'm sure that before too
>long it will become obvious whether the experiment has succeeded or not.
>
>Steve
>
>
>
>
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Ted Husted [mailto:husted@apache.org]
>>Sent: October 2, 2003 10:18 AM
>>To: Struts Developers List
>>Subject: Re: [Vote] Choosing a build/doc gen tool(s) [was: Re: The
>>Forrest Option]
>>
>>
>>Steve Raeburn wrote:
>> > I'd like to add Maven now, learn from the experience on 1.x and then
>> > use that to optimize the project organization and build process for
>> > version 2.
>>
>>If the people voting +1 are ready to roll up their collective sleeves
>>and give Maven a try, then that would be fine with me. The missing piece
>>has been someone saying "I'm ready to do Maven *now*".
>>
>>My only concern is that Maven has not had a stable release. After ten
>>betas, it has just published a RC1, but that's still shy of 1.0.
>>
>>During the 1.1 incubation period, we withheld making a final release
>>until all our dependent JARs were also in a final release state. But,
>>since Maven is a production environment, and not a JAR teams would need
>>to include in their own releases, this consideration might not apply.
>>
>>So, if we would be able to ship a GA of Struts with a Maven Release
>>Candidate, then I'm fine with whatever anyone wants to do.
>>
>>But, if anyone is going to vote against a Struts GA on the grounds that
>>Maven is prerelease, then we should wait until Maven hits 1.0.
>>
>>I don't mind waiting on the Commons Validator, but I wouldn't want to
>>wait on Maven.
>>
>>-Ted.
>>
>>
>>Don Brown wrote:
>> > I'm assuming a move to Maven is inevitable?
>>
>>"You will be assimilated."
>>
>>
>>
>>James Mitchell wrote:
>> > Mavenization:
>> > [ ] +1 - I am in favor of using Maven for build/dist/test/etc.
>> > [X] +0 - I agree, but cannot help at this time.
>> > [ ] -0 - I don't agree, but not enough to give a -1.
>> > [ ] -1 - I am not in favor of using Maven for build/dist/test/etc.
>> >
>> > Forrestization:
>> > [ ] +1 - I am in favor of using Forrest for site generation.
>> > [X] +0 - I agree, but cannot help at this time.
>> > [ ] -0 - I don't agree, but not enough to give a -1.
>> > [ ] -1 - I am not in favor of using Forrest for site generation.
>> >
>> > Other:
>> > [X] - I would like to pursue the Maven-with-Forrest-as-a-plugin idea.
>>
>>
>>
>>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>To unsubscribe, e-mail: struts-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
>>For additional commands, e-mail: struts-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: struts-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: struts-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
>
>
>
>
RE: [Vote] Choosing a build/doc gen tool(s) [was: Re: The
Forrest Option]
Posted by Joe Germuska <Jo...@Germuska.com>.
At 11:04 -0700 10/2/03, Steve Raeburn wrote:
>Well Rob has already made a start on adding Maven. I did try building with
>it, but hit a snag downloading the validator jar and I've not had a chance
>to have another look since.
The snag is that commons-validator-1.1.0.jar is not on the default
(iBiblio) repository. If you get a copy in your own maven
repository, you'll be fine. (I just put in a formal request to have
it uploaded, ref:
http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ViewIssue.jspa?key=MAVEN-879)
If you have the binary for the jar, you can just drop it in your
local repository (on UNIX systems, that would normally be
~/.maven/repository/commons-logging/jars/ -- not real sure for
Windows.)
In theory, you should be able to check out commons-validator from CVS
and install it using "maven jar:install", but I was having problems
with tests last time I tried (weeks ago). You could use "maven
-Dmaven.test.failure.ignore=true jar:install" instead.
Once that's installed, maven java:compile works file for the current
CVS repository of Struts. Yesterday I had trouble with "maven site".
I'm hoping to provide some energy to help Rob, but I'm on a deadline
this week and next. I actually don't have much Maven experience on
something as large as this -- Rob is forging out into the new Maven
"multiproject" plugin, which I hope to learn about but haven't yet...
It's still premature to drop the Ant build, but Maven is ready for
use, say if you want to use it to set up an IDE project in Eclipse,
JBuilder or IDEA, and like I said, for compiling. Actually, I'd be
better able to help if people started posting bugs about it... so
i'd say "dive in!" It's pretty non-invasive.
Joe
--
Joe Germuska
Joe@Germuska.com
http://blog.germuska.com
"We want beef in dessert if we can get it there."
-- Betty Hogan, Director of New Product Development, National
Cattlemen's Beef Association
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: struts-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: struts-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
RE: [Vote] Choosing a build/doc gen tool(s) [was: Re: The Forrest Option]
Posted by Steve Raeburn <sr...@apache.org>.
Well Rob has already made a start on adding Maven. I did try building with
it, but hit a snag downloading the validator jar and I've not had a chance
to have another look since.
I wouldn't have a problem with releasing based on a Maven RC because it's
not a run-time dependency. Having said that I would consider our use of
Maven to be experimental for a while, until we get more familiar with it,
and run it in parallel with the current Ant build. I'm sure that before too
long it will become obvious whether the experiment has succeeded or not.
Steve
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ted Husted [mailto:husted@apache.org]
> Sent: October 2, 2003 10:18 AM
> To: Struts Developers List
> Subject: Re: [Vote] Choosing a build/doc gen tool(s) [was: Re: The
> Forrest Option]
>
>
> Steve Raeburn wrote:
> > I'd like to add Maven now, learn from the experience on 1.x and then
> > use that to optimize the project organization and build process for
> > version 2.
>
> If the people voting +1 are ready to roll up their collective sleeves
> and give Maven a try, then that would be fine with me. The missing piece
> has been someone saying "I'm ready to do Maven *now*".
>
> My only concern is that Maven has not had a stable release. After ten
> betas, it has just published a RC1, but that's still shy of 1.0.
>
> During the 1.1 incubation period, we withheld making a final release
> until all our dependent JARs were also in a final release state. But,
> since Maven is a production environment, and not a JAR teams would need
> to include in their own releases, this consideration might not apply.
>
> So, if we would be able to ship a GA of Struts with a Maven Release
> Candidate, then I'm fine with whatever anyone wants to do.
>
> But, if anyone is going to vote against a Struts GA on the grounds that
> Maven is prerelease, then we should wait until Maven hits 1.0.
>
> I don't mind waiting on the Commons Validator, but I wouldn't want to
> wait on Maven.
>
> -Ted.
>
>
> Don Brown wrote:
> > I'm assuming a move to Maven is inevitable?
>
> "You will be assimilated."
>
>
>
> James Mitchell wrote:
> > Mavenization:
> > [ ] +1 - I am in favor of using Maven for build/dist/test/etc.
> > [X] +0 - I agree, but cannot help at this time.
> > [ ] -0 - I don't agree, but not enough to give a -1.
> > [ ] -1 - I am not in favor of using Maven for build/dist/test/etc.
> >
> > Forrestization:
> > [ ] +1 - I am in favor of using Forrest for site generation.
> > [X] +0 - I agree, but cannot help at this time.
> > [ ] -0 - I don't agree, but not enough to give a -1.
> > [ ] -1 - I am not in favor of using Forrest for site generation.
> >
> > Other:
> > [X] - I would like to pursue the Maven-with-Forrest-as-a-plugin idea.
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: struts-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: struts-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: struts-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: struts-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: [Vote] Choosing a build/doc gen tool(s) [was: Re: The Forrest
Option]
Posted by Ted Husted <hu...@apache.org>.
Steve Raeburn wrote:
> I'd like to add Maven now, learn from the experience on 1.x and then
> use that to optimize the project organization and build process for
> version 2.
If the people voting +1 are ready to roll up their collective sleeves
and give Maven a try, then that would be fine with me. The missing piece
has been someone saying "I'm ready to do Maven *now*".
My only concern is that Maven has not had a stable release. After ten
betas, it has just published a RC1, but that's still shy of 1.0.
During the 1.1 incubation period, we withheld making a final release
until all our dependent JARs were also in a final release state. But,
since Maven is a production environment, and not a JAR teams would need
to include in their own releases, this consideration might not apply.
So, if we would be able to ship a GA of Struts with a Maven Release
Candidate, then I'm fine with whatever anyone wants to do.
But, if anyone is going to vote against a Struts GA on the grounds that
Maven is prerelease, then we should wait until Maven hits 1.0.
I don't mind waiting on the Commons Validator, but I wouldn't want to
wait on Maven.
-Ted.
Don Brown wrote:
> I'm assuming a move to Maven is inevitable?
"You will be assimilated."
James Mitchell wrote:
> Mavenization:
> [ ] +1 - I am in favor of using Maven for build/dist/test/etc.
> [X] +0 - I agree, but cannot help at this time.
> [ ] -0 - I don't agree, but not enough to give a -1.
> [ ] -1 - I am not in favor of using Maven for build/dist/test/etc.
>
> Forrestization:
> [ ] +1 - I am in favor of using Forrest for site generation.
> [X] +0 - I agree, but cannot help at this time.
> [ ] -0 - I don't agree, but not enough to give a -1.
> [ ] -1 - I am not in favor of using Forrest for site generation.
>
> Other:
> [X] - I would like to pursue the Maven-with-Forrest-as-a-plugin idea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: struts-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: struts-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
RE: [Vote] Choosing a build/doc gen tool(s) [was: Re: The Forrest Option]
Posted by Steve Raeburn <sr...@apache.org>.
Maven: +1
Forrest: -0
Forrest plug-in: Possibly, but not yet.
I'm more interested in streamlining the build and I don't consider the
website production to be broken, so Forrest is not a big priority for me.
I'm not saying never, but I see Maven as more of a priority and would rather
wait and see on Forrest.
I'd like to add Maven now, learn from the experience on 1.x and then use
that to optimize the project organization and build process for version 2.
Steve
> -----Original Message-----
> From: James Mitchell [mailto:jmitchell@apache.org]
> Sent: October 1, 2003 9:58 PM
> To: Struts Developers List
> Subject: [Vote] Choosing a build/doc gen tool(s) [was: Re: The Forrest
> Option]
>
>
> Most of us have given (or at least hinted at) our opinions, so
> let's give a
> show of hands:
>
> Mavenization:
> [X] +1 - I am in favor of using Maven for build/dist/test/etc.
> [ ] +0 - I agree, but cannot help at this time.
> [ ] -0 - I don't agree, but not enough to give a -1.
> [ ] -1 - I am not in favor of using Maven for build/dist/test/etc.
>
> Forrestization:
> [X] +1 - I am in favor of using Forrest for site generation.
> [ ] +0 - I agree, but cannot help at this time.
> [ ] -0 - I don't agree, but not enough to give a -1.
> [ ] -1 - I am not in favor of using Forrest for site generation.
>
> Other:
> [X] - I would like to pursue the Maven-with-Forrest-as-a-plugin idea.
>
>
> (If I left out any, please add them)
>
>
>
> One question I have about all this, (and please forgive me if I
> missed it in
> any of the messages in this thread) how does using either approach affect
> the generation of the .tld from our source?
>
>
>
>
> --
> James Mitchell
> Software Engineer / Struts Evangelist
> http://www.struts-atlanta.org
> 678.910.8017
> 770.822.3359
> AIM:jmitchtx
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: struts-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: struts-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org