That sounds great. If I can help in some way let me know, really keen to
have our javadoc published in one way or another.
Gj
On Saturday, September 29, 2018, Antonio <anto...@vieiro.net> wrote:
> Ok. Let's go for the demo.
>
> First let's add the timestamp on the javadocs inside the css only (with a
> footnote:before { content: "${TODAY}"} or something like that), and not on
> every HTML.
>
> Then the new jenkins job. Monday-tuesday could be a preliminar target for
> the demo.
>
> Regarding javadoc.io I think they require uploading the javadoc to Maven
> Central first, so that'll have to wait a little until we have the Maven
> artifacts in place with the new domain.
>
> Cheers,
> Antonio
>
> On 29/09/18 10:14, Geertjan Wielenga wrote:
>
>> Well, let's see that demo first, with your Jenkins job, especially since
>> you can do it quickly. Based on that, we can decide if we like that
>> approach or not, once we see it in action, and then discuss alternatives
>> if
>> needed at that stage.
>>
>> Gj
>>
>> On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 10:00 AM Antonio <anto...@vieiro.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>> On 28/09/18 22:00, Neil C Smith wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Fri, 28 Sep 2018, 20:07 Antonio, <anto...@vieiro.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> 2- http://bits.netbeans.org/dev/javadoc/index.html
>>>>> Requires the DNS stuff being in Apache, setting up a repo and a
>>>>> gitpubsub, will lose previous (5.0-8.2) javadocs.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> No it won't. The idea is to redirect 404s back to Oracle, same as
>>>> already
>>>> discussed with infra about the main website.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Ah, I see, so we need Oracle to set up a "legacy.bits.netbeans.org"
>>> website with the current content, right? So that all 404s that reach
>>> bits.netbeans.org end up in legacy.bits.netbeans.org. Wasn't that the
>>> plan?
>>>
>>> I recall talking something about a proxy to make the whole thing
>>> transparent to the users, but I don't know the details. Maybe you want
>>> to lead this after wednesday?
>>>
>>>
>>>> And possibly not /dev to start with, just /9.0 and /10.0?
>>>>
>>>> I suggested earlier not hosting the Javadocs under netbeans.apache.org
>>>>
>>> at
>>>
>>>> least for now. We could rethink that later, but I think keeping it away
>>>> from JBake would be a very good idea!
>>>>
>>>
>>> There's a misunderstanding here, I think.
>>>
>>> Hosting the javadocs at netbeans.apache.org does not require JBake at
>>> all. It's just copying the generated javadocs in a directory inside the
>>> "content" directory in the "asf-site" branch:
>>>
>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans-website/tree/
>>> asf-site/content
>>>
>>> Adding stuff to a directory there and pushing to the "asf-site" branch
>>> should be good enough. I can set up a Jenkins job for this quickly if
>>> you want to see a demo.
>>>
>>> Anyway, shall we run a voting on the approach, including the javadocs.io
>>> idea from John?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Antonio
>>>
>>>
>>>> But, yes, is there consensus / disagreement to that approach?
>>>>
>>>> Best wishes,
>>>>
>>>> Neil
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@netbeans.incubator.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@netbeans.incubator.apache.org
>>>
>>> For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit:
>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@netbeans.incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@netbeans.incubator.apache.org
>
> For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists
>
>
>
>
