It's in the "official" repo, branch FREEMARKER-154. On Wed, Oct 27, 2021 at 11:27 PM Siegfried Goeschl < siegfried.goes...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Daniel, > > I think my memory is playing tricks on me - I'm pretty sure that there was > some repo with the freemarker-generator documentation you started? > > Can't find it on my laptop, can't find it in Git - any ideas? > > Thanks in advance, > > Siegfried Goeschl > > > > On 27.10.2021, at 14:23, Daniel Dekany <daniel.dek...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > So, you plan to rewrite the documentation starting out from a blank > sheet, > > right? Then I indeed shouldn't put more energy into the conversion, and > at > > least Docgen has become more capable while trying to port the existing > > documentation. The new examples should be chosen so that they are > > realistically runnable inside Docgen (and if it's not too hard, with > Docgen > > running on Windows). > > > > Java 8 date/time wrapping and formatting is clearly top priority, yes. > And > > then at least some basic date/time operations. > > > > On Mon, Oct 25, 2021 at 7:11 PM Siegfried Goeschl < > > siegfried.goes...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> Hi Daniel, > >> > >> Don't be so harsh ;-) > >> > >> * No plans to maintain the Maven site after the initial release > >> * This is open source and therefore best effort > >> * Guess supporting Java 8 date / time is much more important for the > >> community > >> > >> Thanks in advance, > >> > >> Siegfried Goeschl > >> > >> > >>> On 24.10.2021, at 23:38, Daniel Dekany <daniel.dek...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >>> > >>> I did not mean that any of them are blocking. > >>> > >>> Keeping two documentation up to date is a growing pain. It's my > weakness > >>> though that it's still not done. Yet, if you plan to do a bigger > >> reworking, > >>> it's better done on the DocBook version. > >>> > >>> On Sun, Oct 24, 2021 at 6:58 PM Siegfried Goeschl < > >>> siegfried.goes...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> > >>>> Hi Daniel, > >>>> > >>>> Both topics are non-blocking in my opinion > >>>> > >>>> Regarding documentation: > >>>> > >>>> A complete Maven website including Markdown content is generated. And > >>>> documentation will be updated, extended and moved to Docbook but that > >> can > >>>> be done any time - no need to introduce additional dependencies > >>>> > >>>> Regarding backward compatibility: > >>>> > >>>> * The code is mostly written by one person and that's me - so it is > not > >> a > >>>> mature code base > >>>> * There are hardly any users out there and new user will detect bugs, > >>>> suggest improvements or will tell you that some parts are simply > broken > >> by > >>>> design - enforcing backward compatibility will do some harm here > >>>> * I consider backward compatibility important assuming that you HAVE > >> many > >>>> users out there > >>>> * It is a command-line tools mostly used by developers and they know > >> what > >>>> a 0.x release means - some things are in motion and need time to > settle > >>>> > >>>> Thanks in advance, > >>>> > >>>> Siegfried Goeschl > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> On 24.10.2021, at 15:16, Daniel Dekany <daniel.dek...@gmail.com> > >> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> Yes, I guess we can get away with the Maven generated site, if the > >>>> standard > >>>>> ASF footer and that conference ad thingy can be added. It would be > more > >>>>> rational to push through with the conversion to DocBook though. The > >> main > >>>>> cause of the slowdown is that I had this idea that we actually run > >>>>> everything that we show, and never copy-paste sources and output. > That > >>>> was > >>>>> proven to be tricky in many cases, and is still unsolved in some > (like > >>>>> where the example uses Linux shell features). I should just let that > go > >>>> for > >>>>> now and push through with the conversion with copy-pasting where we > >> still > >>>>> have problems. On that note, I wonder if you want to rework the > content > >>>>> anyway, like we want to move most examples outside the documentation, > >> and > >>>>> then people can open them in IDE, modify them to play around, etc. If > >> you > >>>>> do such reworking, or any serious reworking really, that should be > >>>> already > >>>>> done in DocBook. > >>>>> > >>>>> The warning about no backward compatibility needs to be apparent from > >>>>> whatever documentation we release (the DocBook version has it). > >> Backward > >>>>> compatibility is really the main pain with the release. As we promise > >> not > >>>>> backward compatibility, we basically release software without > promising > >>>>> later support. People can still decide to use it (or they just don't > >>>>> realize what this means). But, you may feel pressure to keep backward > >>>>> compatibility instead of doing the right thing, which at this stage > is > >>>>> maybe not wise. (Also no support can be tricky when there's a > security > >>>>> issue with an old release. Although that's probably less relevant > for a > >>>>> tool like this.) > >>>>> > >>>>> On Sun, Oct 24, 2021 at 1:02 PM Siegfried Goeschl < > >>>>> siegfried.goes...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> Hi Daniel, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> There is still the Maven-based site which can be created using > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> mvn clean site site:stage > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I will look into the source release packages ... > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Thanks in advance, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Siegfried Goeschl > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> On 24.10.2021, at 11:38, Daniel Dekany <daniel.dek...@gmail.com> > >>>> wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Still no site for example. Note sure about the others, had to > review > >>>> last > >>>>>>> time's list. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Can we build a source release package with all the necessary > >>>>>>> NOTICE-s/LICENSE-s and signing? For this kind of project we will > also > >>>>>> want > >>>>>>> a binary release package. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Sat, Oct 23, 2021 at 6:59 PM Siegfried Goeschl < > >>>>>>> siegfried.goes...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Hi folks, > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> What stops us from having the first release? Any blockers we are > >> aware > >>>>>> of? > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Thanks in advance, > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Siegfried Goeschl > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>> Best regards, > >>>>>>> Daniel Dekany > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> -- > >>>>> Best regards, > >>>>> Daniel Dekany > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Best regards, > >>> Daniel Dekany > >> > >> > > > > -- > > Best regards, > > Daniel Dekany > > -- Best regards, Daniel Dekany
