On 6/19/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Just an idea: "site" svn-module - base menu + contents - svn:external to documentation of TAG-A, TAG-B, ...
Good idea. In this case the site would be clearly separated from doc, and only the doc would be part of the core trunk. It would still be very easy to contribute to the documentation, and slightly more difficult to the site (need to checkout another svn "module"). To get the documentation working properly even outside the site we would need xooki in the doc AND in the site, but that's not too much a problem, we can even use svn:external. The main difference compared to how it works now is that you wouldn't have the documentation menu directly from the home page, but only on the documentation page, since it would be two separate xoooki install and thus two separate table of content. This isn't too much an issue IMO. What do others think? Xavier Jan
>-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- >Von: Xavier Hanin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Gesendet: Dienstag, 19. Juni 2007 10:55 >An: [email protected] >Betreff: Web site discussion (was Re: Steps toward graduation) > >On 6/19/07, Gilles Scokart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> I like how the menu expands (the sublevel appears progressively). > > >Yes, this is one of the nice effects with jquery. > >I didn't test the doc generation (I don't have a jdk 1.6 on my >machine :-(). > > >I haven't tested either, I will do. Shouldn't be difficult to >fix in case of >a bug. > >I notice a problem when I click on "tutorial" (the page, not >the arrow), the >> menu is not expandable anymore. > > >Good catch, the bug is indeed in all pages which are not at >the root of the >doc directory. Will investigate and fix that asap. > >By the way: >> - Do we still need to generate the doc? (I guess yes, for >google. But >> there >> is maybe other solutions) > > > Which solution are you thinking about? Being badly indexed by >google is a >huge drawback, so I think it's worth the pain of generating >the site. When I >talk about a pain, it's very slight, since with a good target >in our ant >file it's easy and straightforward (as soon as you have ant >1.7 + java 6 OR >rhino in your ant lib - I haven't tested this last option but >we should be >able to make it work). > >- Do you really want to publish the new site. I'm not sure, but it can >> contain doc of things that will only be released in 2.0-alpha-2. > > >This is something that can be discussed indeed. IMO I'd like >to have the >history of old documentations (at least two last releases) and >the current >in development one on the site. With the file based approach >we have it's >not too difficult, but for the moment we only have the latest >one. The main >thing to do to get several labelled versions available on site is to >separate the documentation from the site itself: we don't need >to put an >history of the whole site was at one release, but only the >documentation and >tutorials sections). I should be able to do some javascript to >be able to >extract a part of a xooki site automatically if you think it's >worth it. For >the last release (1.4.1), I think it would be useful to provide the doc >online too, but I'm not sure we'll manage to separate the site >from the doc. > >WDYT? > >Xavier > >Gilles >> >> >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: Xavier Hanin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > Sent: mardi 19 juin 2007 9:39 >> > To: [email protected] >> > Subject: Re: Steps toward graduation >> > >> > On 6/12/07, Stefan Bodewig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > > >> > > On Mon, 11 Jun 2007, Xavier Hanin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > > > On 6/11/07, Stefan Bodewig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > > >> >> > > >> On Thu, 7 Jun 2007, Xavier Hanin ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > > >> >> > > >> > - The code base must contain only ASL or ASL-compatible >> > > >> > dependencies >> > > >> >> > > >> In the case of the non-ASLed JavaScript stuff I'd >like to see a >> > > >> solution other than "we don't ship it" since legally having >> > > >> something in svn means distributing it. >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > I can replace the dependency on ddtree by another js tree >> > > > component. We can use jquery [1] and the tree view >plugin [2] for >> > > > instance. Both are released under a dual GPL and MIT >license [3], >> > > > and MIT license seems to be compatible with ASL [4]. >So, may I go >> > > > this way? >> > > >> > > Yes, the MIT license is compatible with the AL, so which one you >> > > choose is a purely technical decision and that I leave >up to those >> > > who'll have to work with whatever is chosen 8-) >> > >> > >> > I've just checked in an upgraded version of xooki which >does not rely >> any >> > more on ddtree: I've actually removed the dependency on a tree >> component, >> > recent tree components are usually able to deal with >simple ul / li. So >> in >> > our case I've set up a jquery tree (MIT licensed) to >manage our tree >> menu. >> > The modification is in svn, could someone try it before I >upgrade the >> web >> > site? >> > >> > Xavier >> > >> > Stefan >> > > >> > > > [1] http://jquery.com/ >> > > > [2] >http://bassistance.de/jquery-plugins/jquery-plugin-treeview/ >> > > > [3] http://docs.jquery.com/License >> > > > [4] http://wiki.apache.org/jakarta/LicenceIssues >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Xavier Hanin - Independent Java Consultant >> > Manage your dependencies with Ivy! >> > http://incubator.apache.org/ivy/ >> >> > > >-- >Xavier Hanin - Independent Java Consultant >Manage your dependencies with Ivy! >http://incubator.apache.org/ivy/ >
-- Xavier Hanin - Independent Java Consultant Manage your dependencies with Ivy! http://incubator.apache.org/ivy/
