Hi Paul, 2008/12/10 Paul Spencer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Vincent, > The project doxia-test-docs should contain the documents and the document > should be maintained in the projects source repository so they can be > release by the project, i.e. mvn release... The version of this project
It is exactly what this new project does. Have a look inside the project, you could see several Doxia docs (i.e. [1] ) which will be maintained there. > should change whenever the source documents change, i.e when you need to > reload them from the "svn copy", and their is a doxia release. The tests Maybe I confused you when I spoke of "svn copy". To be more clear, all docs are initially copied from their own spaces (see [2]). The test code doesn't use SCM anymore. > using doxia-test-docs may need to extract the documents from the > doxia-test-doc artifact/jar, for which their are maven tools to do the > unpacking. It is exactly what the tests do. See [2] > > Keep in mind, one of the reasons for Maven is enable any user at any time > the ability to successfully rebuild the project. Sure and I think the build is now reproducible. Cheers, Vincent [1] https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/maven/doxia/doxia/trunk/doxia-test-docs/src/main/resources/maven-ant-plugin/fml/ [2] http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=725511&view=rev [3] https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/maven/doxia/doxia/trunk/doxia-core/src/test/java/org/apache/maven/doxia/xsd/AbstractXmlValidatorTest.java > > Paul Spencer > > On Dec 10, 2008, at 8:19 PM, Vincent Siveton wrote: > >> Hi Benjamin and Paul, >> >> According your comments, I created a new module doxia-test-docs which >> includes svn copy on several documents. I also updated tests to fetch >> these changes. >> Any comments are welcome! >> >> Cheers, >> >> Vincent >> >> >> 2008/12/8 Benjamin Bentmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >>> >>> Vincent Siveton wrote: >>> >>>> The tests are to perform XSD validations under our current >>>> documentation. Since we add new XSD files in this release, I think >>>> these tests are useful. >>> >>> No doubt, tests are useful but I feel we mix two different test targets >>> here: >>> >>> a) correctness of the XSDs >>> b) correctness of the currently available Maven documentation >>> >>> IMHO, only point a) should be a concern of Doxia, the rest is just >>> outside >>> world. The day we have a validating Doxia under the hood of the Site >>> Plugin >>> and it detects errors in our docs, we can simply fix them when be try to >>> build the corresponding site, not when building Doxia. >>> >>>> Instead of svn co, we could link to relative doc path, ie from >>>> doxia-module-fml using ../../../plugins/maven-ant-plugin/src/site >>> >>> -1 on hard-coding inter-module or even worse inter-project paths. This >>> introduces tight coupling where none should be. Imagine a contributor to >>> Doxia who wants to try out patching it would end up checking out Maven >>> plugins to test Doxia. >>> >>> Also, both "svn co" and the relative path to a local checkout make the >>> idea >>> of a reproducible build unreachable, as Paul already pointed out. >>> >>> To realize test target a), it is surely a nice idea to just grab samples >>> of >>> existing and presumable good docs and check whether the validator doesn't >>> freak out. To do so, how about if we just collect all the doc files of >>> interest from the Maven/plugin sites and copy them to a new Doxia module >>> (doxia-test-docs or whatever). This module would mimic a "svn co" of a >>> locked SVN revision and is also under Doxia control, i.e. one could also >>> create artifical input documents to check more complex syntax structures >>> that are currently not in use on the Maven sites. The other Doxia modules >>> like XDoc etc. could depend on this test module and extract the input >>> files >>> from the test class path or from local file system after unpacking with >>> the >>> Dependency Plugin. Wouldn't that work? >>> >>> >>> Benjamin >>> > >
