Re: [VOTE] James website update (Was: svn commit: r421896 - in /james/site/trunk/www)
On 7/23/06, Stefano Bagnara [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think that clover, code duplication reports, test results, the dependencies report, the taglist, the changelog, and much other are useful to me. Btw I don't care to publish them to our public site because I think they would be useful only to james committers and much less to james users. I would not want to draw a line so strong. If someone wants to look at some report and make a change, or is running their own branch of the code and wants the changelog and dependency report, more power to them. -- Serge Knystautas Lokitech software . strategy . design http://www.lokitech.com p. 301.656.5501 e. [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] James website update (Was: svn commit: r421896 - in /james/site/trunk/www)
Serge Knystautas wrote: On 7/23/06, Stefano Bagnara [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think that clover, code duplication reports, test results, the dependencies report, the taglist, the changelog, and much other are useful to me. Btw I don't care to publish them to our public site because I think they would be useful only to james committers and much less to james users. I would not want to draw a line so strong. If someone wants to look at some report and make a change, or is running their own branch of the code and wants the changelog and dependency report, more power to them. Maybe it is better that I explain my sentence. I would like to add A LOT of reports to our official site. If they are automatically generated by Maven I don't see drawbacks in having more reports (they have to be mantained would be the drawback for non-automatic reports). Btw, Noel is against this, so I said I don't care to publish them: I meant that I can live even without publishing them. Having a pom.xml in the source distribution is already a good step for any user that know maven and can create the reports in an easy way. Stefano - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] James website update (Was: svn commit: r421896 - in /james/site/trunk/www)
On 7/25/06, Stefano Bagnara [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I would like to add A LOT of reports to our official site. If they are automatically generated by Maven I don't see drawbacks in having more reports (they have to be mantained would be the drawback for non-automatic reports). Agreed. -- Serge Knystautas Lokitech software . strategy . design http://www.lokitech.com p. 301.656.5501 e. [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Use of lists (was Re: [VOTE] James website update (Was: svn commit: r421896 - in /james/site/trunk/www))
Hi, FYI the list for website stuff is site-dev@james.apache.org d. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] James website update (Was: svn commit: r421896 - in /james/site/trunk/www)
Am Dienstag, den 25.07.2006, 11:02 -0400 schrieb Serge Knystautas: On 7/25/06, Stefano Bagnara [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I would like to add A LOT of reports to our official site. If they are automatically generated by Maven I don't see drawbacks in having more reports (they have to be mantained would be the drawback for non-automatic reports). Agreed. I think the most reports are very usefull.. I was scared when lookin at the CPD report and see how much code duplication we have :-( bye Norman signature.asc Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
RE: [VOTE] James website update (Was: svn commit: r421896 - in /james/site/trunk/www)
I would like to add A LOT of reports to our official site. If they are automatically generated by Maven I don't see drawbacks in having more reports (they have to be mantained would be the drawback for non-automatic reports). Superfluous bloat in SVN would be an issue. All of these generated artifacts take up space in Subversion. But if the reports actually have some value ... --- Noel - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] James website update (Was: svn commit: r421896 - in /james/site/trunk/www)
Noel J. Bergman wrote: We also want to change what Maven is generating. Almost all of its default reports should be turned off. The Source Repository report is OK to show the URL, but all of the content should be directed to http://www.apache.org/dev/#svn. We don't want to maintain general SVN instructions. Maven2 automatically generate this page: http://people.apache.org/~bago/james/looktest/jspf/source-repository.html Yes, but http://www.apache.org/dev/#svn is the official content for the ASF. If you feel that there are some improvements that can be made, let's contribute them. They are totally different approaches. The apache page is a set of links most of them are useless to the james user and only useful for us (james committers, or even only james pmc). I still think that this page: http://people.apache.org/~bago/james/site-20060723/server/source-repository.html is much better than any page I can find in the apache website. First of all this return the *real* paths to our repository while apache site return only the root of the asf repository. Btw I'm +1 to use the one provided by maven and -0 to link people to apache links. The only Project Report we should keep is the JavaDocs, and that needs to be per-release level. The Who we are/Project Team is JAMES, not component specific. I agree on the per-release level, but I think that project reports are helpful and if we can generate them automatically and with few effort we should publish them: Which project level reports? I listed: Dependencies, Issue Tracking, Mailing Lists, License as useful. If you like the XRef, that's fine. Other reports are not useful, and some are promos for other people's code. I really don't feel like providing free advertising. Same for the Maven icon. I consider it obnoxious for tools to embed their advertising (spam) in their generated content. --- Noel I think that clover, code duplication reports, test results, the dependencies report, the taglist, the changelog, and much other are useful to me. Btw I don't care to publish them to our public site because I think they would be useful only to james committers and much less to james users. Imo the most important are javadocs and xref, so if you can't live with further reports I'm ok to remove them from the public site. I hope that we, sooner or later, will setup a continuos integration server that will run james and generate the full site with full reports supporting us in our developing cycles. Stefano - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [VOTE] James website update (Was: svn commit: r421896 - in /james/site/trunk/www)
Stefano wrote: Sunny day and I'm sick, so I took some time to look at maven2 generation and css. Sorry to hear it. I created a css for maven2 generated site, that is different from James current style but I think it is something in the middle between Maven2 style and current James style. Looks good, as we've discussed. What is the difference in size between the anakia generated site and the maven 2 generated site? Only for JAMES, not counting jSPF. We want a main site, plus project specific content, and release specific content within project specific content. I agree. I think we can create a maven2 project for our main site using only the content that is not project specific. As I already tried the James site generation using maven2 this should not be a big problem. OK. We also want to change what Maven is generating. Almost all of its default reports should be turned off. The Source Repository report is OK to show the URL, but all of the content should be directed to http://www.apache.org/dev/#svn. We don't want to maintain general SVN instructions. Maven2 automatically generate this page: http://people.apache.org/~bago/james/looktest/jspf/source-repository.html Yes, but http://www.apache.org/dev/#svn is the official content for the ASF. If you feel that there are some improvements that can be made, let's contribute them. The only Project Report we should keep is the JavaDocs, and that needs to be per-release level. The Who we are/Project Team is JAMES, not component specific. I agree on the per-release level, but I think that project reports are helpful and if we can generate them automatically and with few effort we should publish them: Which project level reports? I listed: Dependencies, Issue Tracking, Mailing Lists, License as useful. If you like the XRef, that's fine. Other reports are not useful, and some are promos for other people's code. I really don't feel like providing free advertising. Same for the Maven icon. I consider it obnoxious for tools to embed their advertising (spam) in their generated content. --- Noel - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] James website update (Was: svn commit: r421896 - in /james/site/trunk/www)
Noel J. Bergman wrote: Looks good, as we've discussed. What is the difference in size between the anakia generated site and the maven 2 generated site? Only for JAMES, not counting jSPF. Do you want to know the site of the generated html page or the site used by the whole site once generated? Excluding reports and javadocs/xref the 3 sites together (James + Server + JSPF) are 1.8MB (I'm just uploading a further test and is 1.8MB). Stefano - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] James website update (Was: svn commit: r421896 - in /james/site/trunk/www)
Noel J. Bergman wrote: Done: Added it as the first link of Related Projects. I don't like this too much but it is better than nothing, and we should find a consistent way to publish all of the projects (mime4j, postage, jsieve..) Agreed on all counts. Neither one of us likes the current situation, but agree that doing this is better than not. Sunny day and I'm sick, so I took some time to look at maven2 generation and css. I created a css for maven2 generated site, that is different from James current style but I think it is something in the middle between Maven2 style and current James style. Currently I'm happy with the result: http://people.apache.org/~bago/james/looktest/ http://people.apache.org/~bago/james/looktest/jspf/ For that test I'm generating both James server and James jspf via maven2, and imo this is the way to go. About the look I'm happy with it and I think this is consistent and looks better than both default maven and our current site. About the structure this currently improves only the multisite navigation (via horizontabl bar for projects) but this is the issue where maven2 can be of help and that deserve more work. About the look (skin) jSPF site is generated throught maven2. Maven2 has various level of customizability for its site generation tool. What we could try to do is to create a maven2 skin that somewhat remember the current apache website and then use it for the main website and for james projects. We've got to do something. We want a main site, plus project specific content, and release specific content within project specific content. We also want to change what Maven is generating. Almost all of its default reports should be turned off. Of the Project Documentation set perhaps keep: I agree. I think we can create a maven2 project for our main site using only the content that is not project specific. As I already tried the James site generation using maven2 this should not be a big problem. Maven should be able to automatically find the multiple projects and keep consistency in layouts between them. I have to study a bit more about this and as always I don't know if and when I'll find the time, but this seems the right way. Dependencies, Issue Tracking, Mailing Lists, License The Source Repository report is OK to show the URL, but all of the content should be directed to http://www.apache.org/dev/#svn. We don't want to maintain general SVN instructions. Maven2 automatically generate this page: http://people.apache.org/~bago/james/looktest/jspf/source-repository.html Imho from a user perspective this page is better than http://www.apache.org/dev/#svn Both way we don't have to mantain it, because maven2 generate it automatically. The only Project Report we should keep is the JavaDocs, and that needs to be per-release level. The Who we are/Project Team is JAMES, not component specific. I agree on the per-release level, but I think that project reports are helpful and if we can generate them automatically and with few effort we should publish them: As an example I find very useful the XRef as an additional reference when I use libraries: most time Javadocs are not enough but I don't want to download source distribution just to check a method source. Most of the other reports are more oriented to us: surfire (test reports), tag list, pmd, clover, etc.. I think it is useful to keep them but I don't care as much as for xref. All of this last reports would be a must if we'll ever plan to publish updated references for projects trunks. And I most definitely do not want a Built by Maven logo on the page. I'm -0 about this: if we use maven we should give credits to them. Btw it can be easily hidden via css. I'd be willing to see what such an overall site would look like, but want to see it before we decide to keep it. I think the final goal will be much more similar to: http://directory.apache.org/ They have ApacheDS, MINA and Naming as project categories, we would have Server, jSPF, Postage, Mime4J, jSieve, and so on. I think that directory m2 sources will be helpful when trying to achieve the same goal. Regardless of whether we use the same or different tools to build the site parts, we can merge them via svn (e.g., james/ would come from site/, james/server would come from server/, jspf/ would come from jspf/, etc.). I'd prefer a common look, regardless of which approach we take. Please let me know what do you think of my test look. Stefano - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] James website update (Was: svn commit: r421896 - in /james/site/trunk/www)
Am Sonntag, den 16.07.2006, 18:57 +0200 schrieb Stefano Bagnara: Noel J. Bergman wrote: Done: Added it as the first link of Related Projects. I don't like this too much but it is better than nothing, and we should find a consistent way to publish all of the projects (mime4j, postage, jsieve..) Agreed on all counts. Neither one of us likes the current situation, but agree that doing this is better than not. Sunny day and I'm sick, so I took some time to look at maven2 generation and css. First i hope you feel better tomorrow.. I created a css for maven2 generated site, that is different from James current style but I think it is something in the middle between Maven2 style and current James style. Currently I'm happy with the result: http://people.apache.org/~bago/james/looktest/ http://people.apache.org/~bago/james/looktest/jspf/ For that test I'm generating both James server and James jspf via maven2, and imo this is the way to go. About the look I'm happy with it and I think this is consistent and looks better than both default maven and our current site. I think the look is good (even i like the old james site look more).. I also agree that we should build the site with maven2 with one css so we get a consistent look over all the projects. About the structure this currently improves only the multisite navigation (via horizontabl bar for projects) but this is the issue where maven2 can be of help and that deserve more work. About the look (skin) jSPF site is generated throught maven2. Maven2 has various level of customizability for its site generation tool. What we could try to do is to create a maven2 skin that somewhat remember the current apache website and then use it for the main website and for james projects. We've got to do something. We want a main site, plus project specific content, and release specific content within project specific content. We also want to change what Maven is generating. Almost all of its default reports should be turned off. Of the Project Documentation set perhaps keep: I agree. I think we can create a maven2 project for our main site using only the content that is not project specific. As I already tried the James site generation using maven2 this should not be a big problem. Maven should be able to automatically find the multiple projects and keep consistency in layouts between them. I have to study a bit more about this and as always I don't know if and when I'll find the time, but this seems the right way. Thx for put your hands on this. It whould be cool if you share some docs or links to see how you did it. Dependencies, Issue Tracking, Mailing Lists, License The Source Repository report is OK to show the URL, but all of the content should be directed to http://www.apache.org/dev/#svn. We don't want to maintain general SVN instructions. Maven2 automatically generate this page: http://people.apache.org/~bago/james/looktest/jspf/source-repository.html Imho from a user perspective this page is better than http://www.apache.org/dev/#svn Agree.. better structure and more usefull. Both way we don't have to mantain it, because maven2 generate it automatically. The only Project Report we should keep is the JavaDocs, and that needs to be per-release level. The Who we are/Project Team is JAMES, not component specific. I agree on the per-release level, but I think that project reports are helpful and if we can generate them automatically and with few effort we should publish them: As an example I find very useful the XRef as an additional reference when I use libraries: most time Javadocs are not enough but I don't want to download source distribution just to check a method source. Most of the other reports are more oriented to us: surfire (test reports), tag list, pmd, clover, etc.. I think it is useful to keep them but I don't care as much as for xref. All of this last reports would be a must if we'll ever plan to publish updated references for projects trunks. And I most definitely do not want a Built by Maven logo on the page. I'm -0 about this: if we use maven we should give credits to them. Btw it can be easily hidden via css. Why you don't want this? I think if we use it me should give credit.. Its nothing more then fair. I'd be willing to see what such an overall site would look like, but want to see it before we decide to keep it. I think the final goal will be much more similar to: http://directory.apache.org/ They have ApacheDS, MINA and Naming as project categories, we would have Server, jSPF, Postage, Mime4J, jSieve, and so on. I agree.. The site looks more clear and buisness like. I think that directory m2 sources will be helpful when trying to achieve the same goal. Regardless of whether we use the same or different tools to build the site
Re: [VOTE] James website update (Was: svn commit: r421896 - in /james/site/trunk/www)
Noel J. Bergman wrote: 2) replaced 2.2.0 with 2.3.0 in download.xml Whoops ... this and the related text changes on the main page are premature, until we do release JAMES v2.3. This is the only thing that I feel should be reverted ... FOR NOW. Everything else is a go. I'd really like to publish the site, with all of the JAMES v2.3 beta content; we just can't say that v2.3 is released until it is. I didn't noticed there was updated 2.3.0 references even in index.html. Re-reading you and the related text changes has been useful! I'm fixing this now. I also added jSPF to the Stefano PS: As soon as I'll find the time I'll also create an export for mime4j site (currently in http://www.mime4j.org/) in the james.apache.org/mime4j folder. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] James website update (Was: svn commit: r421896 - in /james/site/trunk/www)
Noel J. Bergman wrote: Several changes: Would you please update the stylesheet to use the ApacheCon US 2006 logo instead of the one from last year? And, yes, you're about to generate a huge number of changed pages. DONE (already updated in my home live export). You can see that the new banner is larger than the one. It is not a big issue by now, maybe we should revert to 2 column style. Also, the beta is 2.3.0b3, not b1. Fixed to say betas and removed references to specific betas, otherwise this would be outdated in a week ;-) We should add jSPF to the navigation tree for the JAMES site, although I really dislike that we have two totally different looks. Done: Added it as the first link of Related Projects. I don't like this too much but it is better than nothing, and we should find a consistent way to publish all of the projects (mime4j, postage, jsieve..) I Don't think I will have the time for this soon, btw --- About the look (skin) jSPF site is generated throught maven2. Maven2 has various level of customizability for its site generation tool. The first is to use one of the default skins: Stylus: http://maven.apache.org/ Default: http://people.apache.org/~bago/james/www/jspf/ The second is to create a simple skin that make only use of css and images. The third is to create a skin module to alter the generation of the website. I already excluse the last because it would take longer than our possibilities. What we could try to do is to create a maven2 skin that somewhat remember the current apache website and then use it for the main website and for james projects. It is really easy to generate james-server website using maven2, so this option should be the easiest. 2) replaced 2.2.0 with 2.3.0 in download.xml Whoops ... this and the related text changes on the main page are premature, until we do release JAMES v2.3. This is the only thing that I feel should be reverted ... FOR NOW. Everything else is a go. I'd really like to publish the site, with all of the JAMES v2.3 beta content; we just can't say that v2.3 is released until it is. Fixed. Stefano PS: if no one will raise his voice I'll wait the 72 hours for this vote to expire and run an svn update on minotaur. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [VOTE] James website update (Was: svn commit: r421896 - in /james/site/trunk/www)
Stefano Bagnara wrote:
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Would you please update the stylesheet to use the ApacheCon US 2006 logo
DONE (already updated in my home live export)
:)
Fixed to say betas and removed references to specific betas
Looks good. We can direct them to http://people.apache.org/dist/james for the
beta release. And we should plan to reorganize for the v2.3 release so that we
have james/server/{source, binaries}, making room for jspf/ to be a peer of
server/.
We should add jSPF to the navigation tree for the JAMES site,
although I really dislike that we have two totally different looks.
Done: Added it as the first link of Related Projects. I don't like
this too much but it is better than nothing, and we should find a
consistent way to publish all of the projects (mime4j, postage, jsieve..)
Agreed on all counts. Neither one of us likes the current situation, but agree
that doing this is better than not.
About the look (skin) jSPF site is generated throught maven2. Maven2 has
various level of customizability for its site generation tool.
What we could try to do is to create a maven2 skin that somewhat
remember the current apache website and then use it for the main
website and for james projects.
We've got to do something. We want a main site, plus project specific content,
and release specific content within project specific content. We also want to
change what Maven is generating. Almost all of its default reports should be
turned off. Of the Project Documentation set perhaps keep:
Dependencies, Issue Tracking, Mailing Lists, License
The Source Repository report is OK to show the URL, but all of the content
should be directed to http://www.apache.org/dev/#svn. We don't want to
maintain general SVN instructions.
The only Project Report we should keep is the JavaDocs, and that needs to be
per-release level. The Who we are/Project Team is JAMES, not component
specific.
And I most definitely do not want a Built by Maven logo on the page.
I'd be willing to see what such an overall site would look like, but want to
see it before we decide to keep it.
Regardless of whether we use the same or different tools to build the site
parts, we can merge them via svn (e.g., james/ would come from site/,
james/server would come from server/, jspf/ would come from jspf/, etc.). I'd
prefer a common look, regardless of which approach we take.
2) replaced 2.2.0 with 2.3.0 in download.xml
Whoops ... this and the related text changes on the main page
are premature, until we do release JAMES v2.3.
Fixed.
:-)
On the jSPF site, cvs.apache.org should be people.apache.org.
--- Noel
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] James website update (Was: svn commit: r421896 - in /james/site/trunk/www)
+1 Norman Am Freitag, den 14.07.2006, 15:26 +0200 schrieb Stefano Bagnara: This time a real, official, standard vote. Normally I wouldn't call a vote for a site update, but I just finished committing more than *1000* files updated in our site/trunk repository. As you can see from the funny comment about the 261 parts it changed almost all the website. I published an export of the updated site here: http://people.apache.org/~bago/james/www/ http://people.apache.org/~bago/james/www/jspf/ Main changes: 1) Added jspf website 2) Changed the left column to include 2.3b documentation 3) Added all the latest documentation under 2.3 submenus (mainly updated by Norman, more to be done) 4) Removed few very old files no more linked. 5) Updated mailets API and James javadoc to 2.3.0b3: the one previously online was related to an old 3.0 trunk that has never really been published (it had repositories in Mailet APIs). It was so bad to have javadocs for an unsupported apis that I decided it was better to put 2.3b without not many discussions about putting 2.2.0 or anything else. A +1 will mean I will leave the code in the current trunk and I will run an update on minotaur to publish the changes. If you cast a -1 please let me know if you are simply against the publishing of the updated website or if you want me to revert the commit. This is far from perfect, but I think it is better than before, so let's publish this, and them we can tune it with further changes (maybe with no need to vote at each one). The commit log explain how I generated the files I committed. Stefano [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Author: bago Date: Fri Jul 14 06:05:56 2006 New Revision: 421896 URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=421896view=rev Log: Update full website to include jspf and 2.3 things. 1) ant website from james/server/trunk root. 2) replaced 2.2.0 with 2.3.0 in download.xml 3) mvn site from james/jspf/trunk root. 4) copied jspf/target/site to site root/jspf 5) fixcrlf on all the html files under www [This commit notification would consist of 261 parts, which exceeds the limit of 50 ones, so it was shortened to the summary.] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] !EXCUBATOR:1,44b79baf43381598049557! signature.asc Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
Re: [VOTE] James website update (Was: svn commit: r421896 - in /james/site/trunk/www)
+1 Vincenzo - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] James website update (Was: svn commit: r421896 - in /james/site/trunk/www)
+1 On Friday 14 July 2006 15:26, Stefano Bagnara wrote: This time a real, official, standard vote. Normally I wouldn't call a vote for a site update, but I just finished committing more than *1000* files updated in our site/trunk repository. As you can see from the funny comment about the 261 parts it changed almost all the website. I published an export of the updated site here: http://people.apache.org/~bago/james/www/ http://people.apache.org/~bago/james/www/jspf/ Main changes: 1) Added jspf website 2) Changed the left column to include 2.3b documentation 3) Added all the latest documentation under 2.3 submenus (mainly updated by Norman, more to be done) 4) Removed few very old files no more linked. 5) Updated mailets API and James javadoc to 2.3.0b3: the one previously online was related to an old 3.0 trunk that has never really been published (it had repositories in Mailet APIs). It was so bad to have javadocs for an unsupported apis that I decided it was better to put 2.3b without not many discussions about putting 2.2.0 or anything else. A +1 will mean I will leave the code in the current trunk and I will run an update on minotaur to publish the changes. If you cast a -1 please let me know if you are simply against the publishing of the updated website or if you want me to revert the commit. This is far from perfect, but I think it is better than before, so let's publish this, and them we can tune it with further changes (maybe with no need to vote at each one). The commit log explain how I generated the files I committed. Stefano [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Author: bago Date: Fri Jul 14 06:05:56 2006 New Revision: 421896 URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=421896view=rev Log: Update full website to include jspf and 2.3 things. 1) ant website from james/server/trunk root. 2) replaced 2.2.0 with 2.3.0 in download.xml 3) mvn site from james/jspf/trunk root. 4) copied jspf/target/site to site root/jspf 5) fixcrlf on all the html files under www [This commit notification would consist of 261 parts, which exceeds the limit of 50 ones, so it was shortened to the summary.] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Søren Hilmer, M.Sc., M.Crypt. wideTrail Phone: +45 25481225 Pilevænget 41 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] DK-8961 Allingåbro Web:www.widetrail.dk - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [VOTE] James website update (Was: svn commit: r421896 - in /james/site/trunk/www)
Stefano Bagnara wrote: Normally I wouldn't call a vote for a site update, but I just finished committing more than *1000* files updated in our site/trunk repository. ROFLMAO! :-D Yes, that's what happens. :-) We've all been there and done that, and had the same reaction. Welcome to the club. :-) I published an export of the updated site here: http://people.apache.org/~bago/james/www/ http://people.apache.org/~bago/james/www/jspf/ Thanks for that, Stefano. :-) Several changes: Would you please update the stylesheet to use the ApacheCon US 2006 logo instead of the one from last year? And, yes, you're about to generate a huge number of changed pages. URL: http://www.apache.org/ads/ApacheCon/234x60-2006-us.gif Also, the beta is 2.3.0b3, not b1. We should add jSPF to the navigation tree for the JAMES site, although I really dislike that we have two totally different looks. There are other things that need to change, but revising the site is an evolution. For example, the version specific docs ought to be under a version specific directory, so that we can publish docs for multiple versions. 2) replaced 2.2.0 with 2.3.0 in download.xml Whoops ... this and the related text changes on the main page are premature, until we do release JAMES v2.3. This is the only thing that I feel should be reverted ... FOR NOW. Everything else is a go. I'd really like to publish the site, with all of the JAMES v2.3 beta content; we just can't say that v2.3 is released until it is. --- Noel - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] James website update (Was: svn commit: r421896 - in /james/site/trunk/www)
Noel J. Bergman wrote: 2) replaced 2.2.0 with 2.3.0 in download.xml Whoops ... this and the related text changes on the main page are premature, until we do release JAMES v2.3. This is the only thing that I feel should be reverted ... FOR NOW. Everything else is a go. I'd really like to publish the site, with all of the JAMES v2.3 beta content; we just can't say that v2.3 is released until it is. Well, this is good, because in fact I did exactly the opposite. Our trunk xdocs already generate 2.3.0 references in the download page, so I replaced 2.3.0 with 2.2.0 before submitting to the site repository. Sorry for the wrong comment, happy to see you noticed this! Stefano PS: about the other things I will do the simple ones before updating. About the layout I did something as a test few weeks ago, but I thought we can live with 2 different layouts for a while: not perfect, but better than nothing! - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
