Gerard van Enk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >I don't think this is a showstopper. It's a petty but documentation can be
> >put online easily. There is some documentation and a bunch of examples.
> >
> >
> >+ Excact location of DTD's in jar.
> 
> Ok, do we need a seperate discussion about this one?

Perhaps we can make a vote for this. More or less like the
security. It is already decided that the DTD's will be shipped in the
jar. And I think there are several options:

1. all dtd's in org.mmbase.resources.dtd (current situation), since
   this can be done by build.xml no actual changes are needed.

 [_] +1 (YEA)

 [_] +0 (ABSTAIN )

 [_] -1 (NAY), because :

 [_] VETO, because:



2. dtd in package next to the class which is using it
   (e.g. org.mmbase.util.logging.resources/logging.dtd I already created - using
   only build.xml - as an example). 

 [_] +1 (YEA)

 [_] +0 (ABSTAIN )

 [_] -1 (NAY), because :

 [_] VETO, because:


3. dtd next to the class  which is using it. (e.g. 
org.mmbase.util.logging/logging.dtd).

 [_] +1 (YEA)

 [_] +0 (ABSTAIN )

 [_] -1 (NAY), because :

 [_] VETO, because:


4. None of the above

 [_] +1 (YEA), because:


2 & 3 need actual movement of the dtd's to the src tree, because otherwise it would 
become unmaintainable.


Since this is not a yes/no vote I dare to express my own preference too:

1:  [X] +0 (ABSTAIN)
2:  [X] +1 (YES)
3:  [X] +0 (ABSTAIN)

I prefer 2 above 3 because we have decided to supply several versions
of the same dtd (builder.dtd, builder_1_0.dtd, builder_1_1.dtd), so
putting them in a directory keeps things cleaner.

 Michiel

-- 
mihxil'  Michiel Meeuwissen 
Mediapark C101 Hilversum  
+31 (0)35 6772979
[]() 

Reply via email to