Hello

Am Wed, 25 Nov 2009 20:13:58 -0600
schrieb Curt Arnold <[email protected]>:

> Got a couple of issues with the docs, in order of significance:
> 
> 
> 1. No "Apache", version number or incubating disclaimer on generated
> docs.  The generated docs have a generic title "Generated
> Documentation" and log4php stands by itself, really should be "Apache
> log4php 2.0.0 (incubating)" or something like that.

Fixed in r884717

> 2.  No ASF header in generated docs
> 
> From http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html
> 
> > What if my project includes its web site within a product
> > distribution?
> > 
> > With few exceptions, all human-readable Apache-developed files that
> > are included within a distribution must include the header text.
> > Documentation, including web site documentation distributed with
> > the release, may include the header text within some form of
> > metadata (such as HTML comments) or as a header or footer appearing
> > in the visible documentation.
> 
> Also
> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#notes-license-headers
> > 
> > The issue of licenses on generated documentation is a little
> > controversial. Copyright may not subsist in a document which is
> > generated by an transformation from an original. In which case, the
> > license header may be unnecessary. License headers should always be
> > present in the original. Where it is reasonable to do so, the
> > templates should also add the license header to the generated
> > documents.
> > 
> 
> 
> If the license header could be templated in as an HTML comment, it
> would eliminate this as a point of contention.

Oh, those license-o-maniacs are beginning to go me on my nerves! :-/
All source code files carry the license and if one clicks on "files"
instead of "classes" they are shown. As I found no way to easily
customize the generated HTML files, played around with the phpdoc
tutorial function and found a way to alter the start page which now
prints only the license. If that's not enough somebody else may spend
his time on this.


 > 3. Generated docs placed in target/site directory.
> 
> target is the default build directory for maven.  Typically, the site
> built with the release is placed in doc, leaving the target directory
> available for end-user builds.  Otherwise, it is easy for a Java
> developer to inadvertently write over the released documentation.
> The "includeSiteDirectory" descriptor in Maven's assembly plugin
> isn't adequately described, but I'm guessing it works with the
> javadoc plugin and does that relocation automatically, but it doesn't
> do the same for phpdoc.

Hmm... the maven-javadoc-plugin and maven-assembly-plugin as I know it
from other projects always use the target/ directory.
And if a programmer executes "mvn site" or similar, well then I would
expect nothing else than that he of course overwrites the released
api documentation as well as the released zip files because that's
just what a build is supposed to.
Or the other way around if a programmer deliberately changes something
in our files then he expect changes in the apidocs and will be very
confused when the one he has open in his browser (doc/apidocs/) will
not change because we regenerated them in target/site/apidocs.
Or maybe I misunderstood the point?

 
> 4. PEAR doesn't include log4php.dtd

Fixed in 884728. The new tutorial.pkg is still excluded but the PEAR
package is not meant to used for building so that's ok.
 
> 5. src/assembly/bin.xml has an obsolete name, src.xml would likely be
> better.

Fixed in 884729

  
> I'm thinking the cumulative is a -1 for me.  Sorry I wasn't able to
> pick this up sooner.  Maven's RAT didn't pick up on the license
> header since it doesn't check the target directory, it does if you
> move target/site to doc.  I don't know if standalone RAT would have
> flagged it.
> 
> I'm going to have some free time on Monday and Tuesday night, but am
> likely out of touch till then.

That were some well spotted issues. Maybe RC3 will finally make it :)

bye,

-christian-

Reply via email to