Re: [site] No commons build

2006-03-16 Thread Niall Pemberton
OK I'm going to stop trying to swim against the flow. Niall On 3/16/06, Stephen Colebourne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Niall Pemberton wrote: > > Another problem is the new "commons" menus doesn't work with distros > > that include their site with the docs - I just checked commons logging > >

Re: [site] No commons build

2006-03-16 Thread Stephen Colebourne
Niall Pemberton wrote: > Another problem is the new "commons" menus doesn't work with distros > that include their site with the docs - I just checked commons logging > and none of the commons entries work - it needs to be changed to > absolute urls, rather than relative. I chose relative URLs del

Re: [site] No commons build

2006-03-16 Thread Niall Pemberton
I have implemented an alternative approach in Validator that uses an svn:external to pull in the commons-build. http://www.mail-archive.com/commons-dev%40jakarta.apache.org/msg76982.html http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi?rev=386450&view=rev I set up a new "shared-build" directory in commons-build

Re: [site] No commons build

2006-03-16 Thread Niall Pemberton
OK I fixed this and uploaded a new version. http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?rev=386376&view=rev Niall - Original Message - From: "Niall Pemberton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 3:08 PM Another problem is the new "commons" menus doesn't work with distros that include

Re: [site] No commons build

2006-03-16 Thread Rahul Akolkar
On 3/16/06, Niall Pemberton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 3/15/06, Stephen Colebourne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Progress to remove commons-build seems to be moving along nicley. So far > > at least [lang], [io], [primitives], [collections], [codec], [logging] > > and [betwixt] are done, plus

Re: [site] No commons build

2006-03-16 Thread Niall Pemberton
Another problem is the new "commons" menus doesn't work with distros that include their site with the docs - I just checked commons logging and none of the commons entries work - it needs to be changed to absolute urls, rather than relative. Niall On 3/16/06, Niall Pemberton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> w

Re: [site] No commons build

2006-03-16 Thread James Mitchell
Also -1 to having the docs depend on javascript. I am also -1 (PMC binding vote) -- James Mitchell EdgeTech, Inc. http://edgetechservices.net/ 678.910.8017 Skype: jmitchtx On Mar 16, 2006, at 9:24 AM, Niall Pemberton wrote: On 3/15/06, Stephen Colebourne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Progres

Re: [site] No commons build

2006-03-16 Thread Niall Pemberton
On 3/15/06, Stephen Colebourne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Progress to remove commons-build seems to be moving along nicley. So far > at least [lang], [io], [primitives], [collections], [codec], [logging] > and [betwixt] are done, plus [pool] unpublished. > > > I believe that I may have an even sn

Re: [site] No commons build

2006-03-15 Thread Dion Gillard
Commons Jexl done. On 3/16/06, Oleg Kalnichevski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Wed, 2006-03-15 at 00:12 +, Stephen Colebourne wrote: > > Progress to remove commons-build seems to be moving along nicley. So far > > at least [lang], [io], [primitives], [collections], [codec], [logging] > > a

Re: [site] No commons build

2006-03-15 Thread Oleg Kalnichevski
On Wed, 2006-03-15 at 00:12 +, Stephen Colebourne wrote: > Progress to remove commons-build seems to be moving along nicley. So far > at least [lang], [io], [primitives], [collections], [codec], [logging] > and [betwixt] are done, plus [pool] unpublished. > > Commons [HttpClient] converted

RE: [site] No commons build

2006-03-14 Thread Jörg Schaible
Hi Stephen, Stephen Colebourne wrote on Wednesday, March 15, 2006 1:12 AM: > Progress to remove commons-build seems to be moving along > nicley. So far > at least [lang], [io], [primitives], [collections], [codec], [logging] > and [betwixt] are done, plus [pool] unpublished. > > > I believe tha