I looked into how to include the prettify directory with the .jar, and the only way I found is to copy the prettify dir to @destDir/prettify in "invoke-javadoc" macro. The reason is that when "jarify" is called later, it takes only a baseDir and not a fileset, so 'prettify' must already exist underneath the component's docs dir.
The outcome though is that prettify will exist under each component's docs dir, in addition to being their sibling. So either: * We do that, but don't copy prettify as their sibling, and adjust the references to the JS file accordingly. * Someone else can help me figure out how to jarify the prettify dir under a component's docs dir, without copying it there first ... Shai On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 5:02 PM, Steven A Rowe <sar...@syr.edu> wrote: > Hi Shai,**** > > ** ** > > I think the prettify stuff should be included in the .jar**** > > ** ** > > It’s possible that I messed this up in the packaging work I’ve done > recently, but if so, it was not intentional.**** > > ** ** > > Steve**** > > ** ** > > *From:* Shai Erera [mailto:ser...@gmail.com] > *Sent:* Wednesday, September 21, 2011 8:10 AM > *To:* dev@lucene.apache.org > *Subject:* Prettify JS and CSS exceluded from Javadocs**** > > ** ** > > Hi > > I noticed that our build does not include the prettify JS and CSS with > Javadocs, unless the javadocs are created for the release. For example, if > you open any of the *javadocs.jar files (core or contrib), you'll see that > the prettify files are missing. Therefore, documentation which relies on it > is not displayed nicely (such as contrib-highlight). > > The invoke-javadoc macro copies the prettify files and adds references to > them, but when the javadocs are jar-ed, the files are omitted. > > At first I thought that this is a bug, but then I noticed how the files are > referenced, and the directory structure that is assumed to be created for > the javadocs, and thought that this may be intentional? When the release > binaries are created, a folder docs/api is created, under which there are > sub-folders for 'core' and 'contrib-*'. Also, a sub-folder for prettify. So > prettify is assumed to be 'sibling' of any of the javadocs folders, and the > reference in the HTML is created as such. > > However, if we add prettify to any of the .jar, then it won't be a sibling > anymore, but a 'child', and the reference should change from ../prettify/* > to prettify/*. > > I think this can be solved easily by referencing two scripts (and perhaps > same trick for stylesheet as well) -- only one of them will be found > depending on the distribution. I wanted to ask first if the prettify files > were omitted from the .jar intentionally or not. > > Shai**** >
