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'.
It would be nice if this could be done daily with the distribution. Perhaps a postGoal to the build.
-- James Mitchell Software Engineer / Open Source Evangelist EdgeTech, Inc. 678.910.8017 AIM: jmitchtx
----- Original Message ----- From: "Martin Cooper" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Struts Developers List" <dev@struts.apache.org>
Sent: Monday, January 17, 2005 2:30 PM
Subject: Re: Adjustments to Struts Nightly Builds
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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
