You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@forrest.apache.org by Nicola Ken Barozzi <ni...@apache.org> on 2004/02/06 14:03:53 UTC
[VOTE] Forrest adopting Alexandria?
Some months ago I have been working on Jakarta Alexandria. Unfortunately
I was the last committer, and since there was no more interest, it stopped.
Currently the Alexandria codebase is able to generate the following:
http://cvs.apache.org/~nicolaken/whiteboard/alexandria-docs/xml-cocoon/
Actually, thanks to dims, who surprisingly :-) did some work on it
lately, the javasrc part works like this (example run on the maven
codebase):
http://nagoya.apache.org/~dims/maven/
Currently Forrest has the site system (core), the forrestbot, the
mozilla toolbar... what do others think, should it also have a
forrestcode part with the stuff currently in Alexandria?
I think that moving it in Forrest would be beneficial both to the
Alexandria code, and to Forrest.
+1
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi nicolaken@apache.org
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: [VOTE] Forrest adopting Alexandria?
Posted by Dave Brondsema <da...@brondsema.net>.
Quoting Stefano Mazzocchi <st...@apache.org>:
>
> On 7 Feb 2004, at 18:43, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
>
> > Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> > ...
> >> What it will do is to generate a single unified view and
> >> documentation of the source code.
> >
> > The result of this vote is positive, but not 100% consensus. Most
> > seems because of not having clear what it will be about.
> >
> > Hence I will put it in the scratchpad, and work on it there. In this
> > way everyone can understand more about it and it will still have to be
> > voted in the core codebase when ready.
>
> Looks like a wise decision to me. +1
>
Me too. +1
--
Dave Brondsema
dave@brondsema.net
http://www.brondsema.net - personal
http://www.splike.com - programming
http://csx.calvin.edu - student org
Re: [VOTE] Forrest adopting Alexandria?
Posted by Stefano Mazzocchi <st...@apache.org>.
On 7 Feb 2004, at 18:43, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> ...
>> What it will do is to generate a single unified view and
>> documentation of the source code.
>
> The result of this vote is positive, but not 100% consensus. Most
> seems because of not having clear what it will be about.
>
> Hence I will put it in the scratchpad, and work on it there. In this
> way everyone can understand more about it and it will still have to be
> voted in the core codebase when ready.
Looks like a wise decision to me. +1
--
Stefano.
Re: [VOTE] Forrest adopting Alexandria?
Posted by Nicola Ken Barozzi <ni...@apache.org>.
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
...
> What it will do is to generate a single unified view and documentation
> of the source code.
The result of this vote is positive, but not 100% consensus. Most seems
because of not having clear what it will be about.
Hence I will put it in the scratchpad, and work on it there. In this way
everyone can understand more about it and it will still have to be voted
in the core codebase when ready.
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi nicolaken@apache.org
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: [VOTE] Forrest adopting Alexandria?
Posted by Nicola Ken Barozzi <ni...@apache.org>.
Dave Brondsema wrote:
> Quoting Ross Gardler <rg...@apache.org>:
>
>
>>Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
>>
>>>I think that moving it in Forrest would be beneficial both to the
>>>Alexandria code, and to Forrest.
>>
>>+0
>>
>>My only concern is that this is pretty specific functionality of use to
>>only a certain type of site, i.e. project sites. I have no problem with
>>the functionality being there, it's just I don;t need it right now.
>
> -1
>
> This sounds too much like maven. http://maven.apache.org/ Maven is a build
> tool that "throws in a website for free". Included in the website are many
> project reports.
Alexandria/forrestcode does not generate reports, and it will not be
integrated in Forrest core, at least for now.
> Personally I don't think a build tool and a website/report
> generator should be integrated, but maven does it and they already have an
> impressive list of reports (http://maven.apache.org/maven-reports.html).
Not that impressive, as most are not done by Maven but just external
tools that are integrated.
Forrestcode is not about integratimg outside report generators, but
about making a new generator for documenting the code.
We could call it "javadocs for all docs".
> I would suggest incorporating unique features of alexandria into maven.
If they want to do so, they are welcome. It has been already told months
ago, but they did not seem interested.
> At my company, we prefer forrest sites over maven sites, so we have a few custom
> scripts that will run things like javadocs, checkstyle, jlint, etc, transform
> the results into forrest docs, and copy them into each project's forrest xdocs
> directory. This approach could be used for those who want code reports in forrest.
forrestcode is only about code docs, not reports.
What it will do is to generate a single unified view and documentation
of the source code.
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi nicolaken@apache.org
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: [VOTE] Forrest adopting Alexandria?
Posted by Dave Brondsema <da...@brondsema.net>.
Quoting Ross Gardler <rg...@apache.org>:
> Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> >
> > I think that moving it in Forrest would be beneficial both to the
> > Alexandria code, and to Forrest.
>
> +0
>
> My only concern is that this is pretty specific functionality of use to
> only a certain type of site, i.e. project sites. I have no problem with
> the functionality being there, it's just I don;t need it right now.
>
-1
This sounds too much like maven. http://maven.apache.org/ Maven is a build
tool that "throws in a website for free". Included in the website are many
project reports. Personally I don't think a build tool and a website/report
generator should be integrated, but maven does it and they already have an
impressive list of reports (http://maven.apache.org/maven-reports.html). I
would suggest incorporating unique features of alexandria into maven.
At my company, we prefer forrest sites over maven sites, so we have a few custom
scripts that will run things like javadocs, checkstyle, jlint, etc, transform
the results into forrest docs, and copy them into each project's forrest xdocs
directory. This approach could be used for those who want code reports in forrest.
--
Dave Brondsema
dave@brondsema.net
http://www.brondsema.net - personal
http://www.splike.com - programming
http://csx.calvin.edu - student org
Plugin Use cases (was: Re: [VOTE] Forrest adopting Alexandria?)
Posted by Ross Gardler <rg...@apache.org>.
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> Ross Gardler wrote:
>
>> Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> I think that moving it in Forrest would be beneficial both to the
>>> Alexandria code, and to Forrest.
>>
>>
>>
>> +0
>>
>> My only concern is that this is pretty specific functionality of use
>> to only a certain type of site, i.e. project sites. I have no problem
>> with the functionality being there, it's just I don;t need it right now.
>
>
> It would be available initially as a separate subcode, and available as
> a separate forrest run command (ie 'forrest code')
Cool, can't see that getting in the way of anything else. I'd be +1 but
for time restrictions right now, I know I will use this at some point in
the future.
>> Would such extensions be made available via some kind of plug-in
>> framework (eventually). I ask because I have a number of extensions in
>> my own work that would benifit specific use cases, but aren't really
>> applicable to the core Forrest system.
>
>
> Plugins for the processing are planned, so it should be able in the
> future to have a plugin add schemas that can be processed. What
> extensions are they (it could help to refine the plugin usecase)?
Right now it is mainly stuff we have talked about in the past. For
example, the generation of slides from my source document as well as
normal HTML/PDF etc. My source documents are not always in a "usefull"
format, for example, java code. I think this is a similar use case to
creating, for example, the JavaDoc code from a java source file. What
would happen is that some component would extract the key information
from the Java code (marked up with comments).
Another would be the use of MathML or TeX to create mathematics markup
(via SVG) as discussed in a recent thread. This may require the addition
of a Cocoon component to Forrest, but most users will not need this
component.
My requriements go further in that I need to be able to create a dynamic
version of the site too (interactive tutorials for example). So, in most
cases, I am wanting to put functionality into the version of Cocoon
shipped with Forrest. Some of this will massively increase the size of a
Forrest distribution and isn't applicable to most (current) Forrest
uses. Therefore, it really needs to be separate from the core of Forrest.
Recently I've been thinking that I should be working from the other
direction. That is I should be starting with Cocoon and bringing a
Forrest generated webapp into that. I've not really sat down to work out
the best route yet.
Ross
Re: [VOTE] Forrest adopting Alexandria?
Posted by Nicola Ken Barozzi <ni...@apache.org>.
Ross Gardler wrote:
> Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
>
>>
>> I think that moving it in Forrest would be beneficial both to the
>> Alexandria code, and to Forrest.
>
>
> +0
>
> My only concern is that this is pretty specific functionality of use to
> only a certain type of site, i.e. project sites. I have no problem with
> the functionality being there, it's just I don;t need it right now.
It would be available initially as a separate subcode, and available as
a separate forrest run command (ie 'forrest code')
In CVS it would be:
xml-forrest/src/core
/forrestbor
/forrestbar
-> /forrestcode
> Would such extensions be made available via some kind of plug-in
> framework (eventually). I ask because I have a number of extensions in
> my own work that would benifit specific use cases, but aren't really
> applicable to the core Forrest system.
Plugins for the processing are planned, so it should be able in the
future to have a plugin add schemas that can be processed. What
extensions are they (it could help to refine the plugin usecase)?
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi nicolaken@apache.org
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: [VOTE] Forrest adopting Alexandria?
Posted by Ross Gardler <rg...@apache.org>.
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
>
> I think that moving it in Forrest would be beneficial both to the
> Alexandria code, and to Forrest.
+0
My only concern is that this is pretty specific functionality of use to
only a certain type of site, i.e. project sites. I have no problem with
the functionality being there, it's just I don;t need it right now.
Would such extensions be made available via some kind of plug-in
framework (eventually). I ask because I have a number of extensions in
my own work that would benifit specific use cases, but aren't really
applicable to the core Forrest system.
Ross
Re: [VOTE] Forrest adopting Alexandria?
Posted by "Stephan E. Schlierf" <st...@vsa.de>.
+1
Stephan
Nicola Ken Barozzi schrieb:
>
> Some months ago I have been working on Jakarta Alexandria. Unfortunately
> I was the last committer, and since there was no more interest, it stopped.
>
> Currently the Alexandria codebase is able to generate the following:
>
> http://cvs.apache.org/~nicolaken/whiteboard/alexandria-docs/xml-cocoon/
>
> Actually, thanks to dims, who surprisingly :-) did some work on it
> lately, the javasrc part works like this (example run on the maven
> codebase):
>
> http://nagoya.apache.org/~dims/maven/
>
> Currently Forrest has the site system (core), the forrestbot, the
> mozilla toolbar... what do others think, should it also have a
> forrestcode part with the stuff currently in Alexandria?
>
> I think that moving it in Forrest would be beneficial both to the
> Alexandria code, and to Forrest.
>
> +1
>
Re: [VOTE] Forrest adopting Alexandria?
Posted by Stefano Mazzocchi <st...@apache.org>.
On 6 Feb 2004, at 08:03, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
>
> Some months ago I have been working on Jakarta Alexandria.
> Unfortunately I was the last committer, and since there was no more
> interest, it stopped.
>
> Currently the Alexandria codebase is able to generate the following:
>
>
> http://cvs.apache.org/~nicolaken/whiteboard/alexandria-docs/xml-
> cocoon/
>
> Actually, thanks to dims, who surprisingly :-) did some work on it
> lately, the javasrc part works like this (example run on the maven
> codebase):
>
> http://nagoya.apache.org/~dims/maven/
>
> Currently Forrest has the site system (core), the forrestbot, the
> mozilla toolbar... what do others think, should it also have a
> forrestcode part with the stuff currently in Alexandria?
>
> I think that moving it in Forrest would be beneficial both to the
> Alexandria code, and to Forrest.
>
> +1
+1
--
Stefano.