I'm not happy about it :-) * A top-level "templates" directory makes IntelliJ happy when includes are used * I have an ExamplesTest which tests each documented command line usage and I prefer to have it in sync with the documentation * I actually tried it but reverted the changes since the Travis build fails
Thanks in advance, Siegfried Goeschl > On 28.07.2020, at 22:34, Daniel Dekany <[email protected]> wrote: > > It's just that "templates" belongs to the "main" source code of the > freemarker-generator-cli, similarly to config/freemarker-cli.properties, > which is under src/main. (I think many of us expect a Maven project root > directory to only contain the "noise" needed for build and legal, and "src" > that contains *all* the essential source code.) Also, as the source tree > doesn't mirror the binary distribution directory tree anyway, so I'm not > sure if there's any fundamental reason to make an exception with > "templates", and put it under the root. > > On Tue, Jul 28, 2020 at 4:09 PM Siegfried Goeschl < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi folks, >> >> Back from the mountains and in front of the keyboard again :-O >> >> * I created a JIRA ticket and will push a feature branch soon (bad habits >> die hard) >> * I will go through the licences (review and collect in "licenses" >> directory) >> * Good point about plugin versions being defined in apache POM - will >> rework them >> * I will delete the existing configuration of the "release" profile >> >> Some things to discuss >> >> * What are the benefits to move "templates" to "src/main/templates"? >> Currently they are in sync with "freemarker-cli" which is quite nice for >> tests & documentation ... >> >> Thanks in advance, >> >> Siegfried Goeschl >> >> >>> On 26.07.2020, at 01:27, Daniel Dekany <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> I said I will help in the Apache release process, so only focusing on >> that, >>> so some points: >>> >>> - We are required to have a so-called source release (every other >>> artifact is optional in the policy). As we are using the >> org.apache:apache >>> parent, that should generate that automatically, with .asc and sha512 >> and >>> all. But currently it doesn't, because maven-release-plugin >> config/argument >>> is overwritten with this: >> <arguments>-Dmaven.javadoc.skip=true</arguments>. >>> We should keep configuring release at minimum, to avoid such accidents. >>> Maybe as in >>> https://github.com/apache/freemarker-docgen/blob/master/pom.xml#L70. >>> - I assume we also want a binary release, for the CLI only, and >>> freemarker-generator-cli-x.y.z-*app*.zip (note the "-app") will be our >>> binary release artifact. Then: >>> - It bundles some dependency binaries that are not under ASL2 license. >>> Unfortunately, the licenses of those must be included in the >>> distribution. >>> See the LICENSE at >>> https://github.com/apache/freemarker-docgen/blob/master/LICENSE. At >>> the bottom, it lists the licenses, then it refers to the actual >> license >>> files. As we will have many licenses, let's create a "licenses" >> directory >>> for them. (In the future, the dependencies have to be checked >>> for changes. >>> Even version upgrades my pull in sneaky transient dependencies. Some >>> licenses are not even allowed, so anything but ASL2, MIT, >>> BSD-without-advertisement-clause, will need closer attention.) >>> - I noticed that the documentation is not included in the binary >>> distribution. But because of the extra legal burden including it >> would >>> bring (we have fonts and icons under CC-SA and SIL OFL in the Docgen >>> output), I actually prefer that to stay like that. >>> - .sha512 file is not yet generated >>> - freemarker-generator-cli/src/site: If you agree, instead of this I >>> will create freemarker-generator*-site*/src/docgen, and convert the >>> Markdown to XDocBook. For now this will be only the CLI documentation, >> and >>> the JavaDoc, as the freemarker-generator-maven-plugin is not ready. One >>> annoyance I realized is that we should have Docgen in Maven Central >> for the >>> builds to work reliably in the future, which means that Docgen has to >> be >>> officially released (it never was, it's an internal tool). That would >> be a >>> minimalistic release, means, no announcement, no web site, just the >> bare >>> minimum (i.e., source release, and deployment to Maven Central). I have >>> some backlog there (Google keeps nagging me about mobile issues), but I >>> hope I can fix that in the coming days, then go through the official >>> release process (takes 1-2 weeks). >>> - Some smaller things: >>> - >>> - Having a "release" profile is also hopefully unnecessary, because >>> org.apache:apache takes care of signing. >>> - We should also remove most plugin version management, as many of >>> those versions are set in org.apache:apache. >>> - freemarker-generator-cli/templates should be inside >>> freemarker-generator-cli/src/main/templates, I guess. >>> >>> P.s.: Siegfired asked our opinions in another thread. I did my part, even >>> too much (;, so, would be good if others participate in that as well. >>> >>> -- >>> Best regards, >>> Daniel Dekany >> >> > > -- > Best regards, > Daniel Dekany
