(Man, I am drowning in dev@ messages these days! I'm about 100 behind right now and losing...)
At one point I did start on an Ant based build system, since I had just finished one for my day job. However, before I got too far, James M started some serious hacking on Maven builds, so I switched camps and started cleaning up the core Maven build. A Maven build for the site is on my to-do list, but as you've no doubt noticed, I haven't had a whole lot of time to spend on it lately. I am hoping to get back to it soon - perhaps this thread will be sufficient as a nudge. ;-) -- Martin Cooper On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 10:42:36 -0800, Don Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I know I haven't been keeping up on this as I should have, but wasn't > Martin reworking all the Ant scripts? Perhaps website building was > included? > > Don > > Ted Husted wrote: > > The best example of what I believe we want to do is the Jakarta Commons, > > which is Maven based. > > > > It might not be hard to add a Ant build file to Core to just build the web > > site, based on what is now over in Apps, or the build file from 1.2. > > > > It wouldn't have to build JARs, just run the XMLs through the Ant. > > > > Once we had the site building again, perhaps someone could add a section to > > the Roadmap on where we stand with this. There's been traffic on the list, > > but it's hard to keep up with the threads sometimes. > > > > My own preference would be to use Maven, but, in the end, them that does > > the work make the decisions. > > > > -Ted. > > > > On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 10:23:53 -0800, Don Brown wrote: > > > >> Ted Husted wrote: > >> > >>> In the midst of the reorganization, the targets that would build > >>> the website content were separated from the content. The usual > >>> approach was to build the documentation application and then > >>> upload that, so those Ant targets marched over to the Apps > >>> subproject. Meanwhile, the content is still under Core (in docs). > >>> I usually just built the website locally (there was a target for > >>> that) and would then scp the pages up to the server, without > >>> messing about with the WAR. > >>> > >> > >> Yes, this is what I have done in the past. So what you are saying > >> is that currently, the website build is broken. What I'm wanting > >> to do is update the website so I can announce Struts Flow. Struts > >> Flow will add three new pages so that might be too big to just hack > >> the HTML itself. > >> > >> > >>> The end-game is to create a separate "site" subproject for the > >>> top-level project that would introduce the project as a whole and > >>> link into each subproject. Each subproject would have its own set > >>> of documentation, in its own folder, perhaps done through Maven. > >>> Other "mega-projects", like Logging, seem to be doing that now. > >>> Building the Struts site would then be something like building > >>> the Jakarta Commons site. > >>> > >> > >> Well, that gets us back into the Maven vs. Ant debate. I'd imagine > >> we don't want to have part of the build require Ant, and the other > >> require Maven. Are there any examples of this being done that use > >> Ant? > >> > >> Don > >> > >> > >>> -Ted. > >>> > >>> > >>> On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 17:55:53 -0800, Don Brown wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>>> Ok, I give up - how do you build the Struts website? Last I > >>>> remember, I used ant which pulled the content from /docs but I > >>>> can't seem to find any site building task in build.xml. Are we > >>>> now only using maven and /xdocs? > >>>> > >>>> Don > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > 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] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
