Hi Georg, On 04.12.13 12:46, Georg Kallidis wrote: > how is the fulcrum site be prepared to get it up to date again ( > http://turbine.apache.org/fulcrum/ ) ?
I guess "not at all" describes it best. Sorry for the mess. > This has be done probably the last time from the trunk. I think, if we > update now the site the released components get the Javadocs from the > current trunk. Is this ok? A tagged version should then be generated for > the entire fulcrum tree (?). Some more updates seem to the necessary > (xdocs7navigation.xml, pom.xml...). I have some more concerns to do this > right now: I don't think so. The Fulcrum site is not a multiproject build AFAIR. And if it is currently, it should not be. All links are done manually. Be aware that all module directories *must* be excluded from the scm-publish plugin or else a commit will delete them. The best option would be to disable deletes completely. See the Turbine-site POM for an example. > 1) Dependencies: Building the site fails due to the fact, that a lot of > fulcrum (cache, bsf, commonsmail, crypto) components depend on > fulcrum-parent v1 (current version is v2-SNAPSHOT). Changing the version > to v2-SNAPSHOT the site build seems to execute successfully. But the > parent fulcrum-parent v2-SNAPSHOT depends on turbine-parent v2 not the > current turbine-parent v3. Do we not need another fulcrum-parent, which > does depend on turbine-parent version 3? Well, I tried to kill the additional parent level with the components that I updated recently. Fulcrum-parser for example derives directly from Turbine-parent 3. So does Fulcrum-intake. I don't know if this is wise, however, my related question on the mailing list remained unanswered. So I decided to go ahead. Right now this means to configure the assembly plugin in each and every component POM which is sub-optimal to say the least. I thought about a "Fulcrum profile" in the parent POM but couldn't get it to work. > 2) Labeling: In the current fulcrum site there is no section for non > released components or components in development. Shouldn´t be the > dormant components renamed to components in development? This could > include old "dormant" and new not released components. Within Apache Commons, there are "proper", "dormant" and "sandbox" components. I'd suggest to go with these terms. From what I understand, "dormant" means unmaintained whereas "sandbox" means "not yet released". Hope this helps. Bye, Thomas. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
