On 21 Mar 2004, at 22:12, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
yep, I think we are settled on the design in this area. So what are
your
sentimate on the overall toplevel site generation. Do you feel its
adequate to replace the existing contents at this time?
I would say the time is right to update the main
> yep, I think we are settled on the design in this area. So what are your
> sentimate on the overall toplevel site generation. Do you feel its
> adequate to replace the existing contents at this time?
I would say the time is right to update the main site. Then people can
comment on it and it'll g
uot;Mark R. Diggory" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, March 20, 2004 8:17 PM
Subject: Re: [common-build]
Yes, thats what I meant by the second item on the list. It was unclear
to me if we had achieved consistency acr
List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, March 20, 2004 8:17 PM
Subject: Re: [common-build]
> Yes, thats what I meant by the second item on the list. It was unclear
> to me if we had achieved consistency across all the sub-project
> navigation.xml docs at this point.
>
> So
Yes, thats what I meant by the second item on the list. It was unclear
to me if we had achieved consistency across all the sub-project
navigation.xml docs at this point.
Some thoughts:
a.) Approach I was advocating was to use commons-site.jsl to control
navigation creation and ordering so that
Looks good, although I thought that we now had a single include strategy for
subprojects.
Stephen
- Original Message -
From: "Mark R. Diggory" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Whats our current status on the the top level site? I think its obvious
> that we have at reached a LCD (least common denomi
Whats our current status on the the top level site? I think its obvious
that we have at reached a LCD (least common denominator) on the
navigation for the time being. So I'm going to break down things into a
list of steps to get through for migration of the "commons" toplevel to
the mavenized s
