On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 11:17:33 -0800, Craig McClanahan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 14:10:57 -0500, James Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > For these reasons, I think the uber-build, if we have one, > > > should be kept very simple. > > > > Would the uber-build also generate the global 'site' that glues all the > > other docs together? > > > > Isn't building the site still the same as the result of building > "apps/documentation"? If so, that could be uploaded as a separate > artifact so it wouldn't have to be combined into the artifact for the > core library.
What I would like to see is each subproject having its own docs, and 'site' having the glue that pulls the others together. I'd also like to see us move to a model where we check in the site(s) so that updating the live site is simply an 'svn up'. (I know the infra@ folks would like to see this too.) This would allow for automated site refreshes, eliminating the (funky, IMHO) current mechanism of uploading a war and logging on to explode it in place. -- Martin Cooper > > > > -- > > James Mitchell > > Craig > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
