[log4cxx] Site / Release?

I have ported all of the documentation that is currently built with maven to Markdown to make it possible to generate the single site with Doxygen. You can see the results here: https://rm5248.com/log4cxx/apidocs/ Overall, this seems to be a much easier way to build the site and documentation, si

Re: [log4cxx] Site / Release?

If you aren’t already, just be aware that the web site is actually deployed from https://github.com/apache/logging-log4cxx-site following the instructions at https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/LOGGING/Managing+the+Logging+Services+Web+Sites in the section titled "Updating Logging Servi

Re: [log4cxx] Site / Release?

Guten Tag Robert Middleton, am Samstag, 26. Dezember 2020 um 19:10 schrieben Sie: > Thoughts? Do you really think the changes for 0.11.1 are worth it to do a release or do you only want to have a release testing+documenting the new release process with? I'm somewhat sure to try your changes on my

Re: [log4cxx] Site / Release?

The doxygen style is looking a bit old now - could we move to Doxygen + Breath + Sphinx? Here is a old resource walking through the process of integrating into CMake: https://devblogs.microsoft.com/cppblog/clear-functional-c-documentation-with-sphinx-breathe-doxygen-cmake/

Re: [log4cxx] Site / Release?

Guten Tag Stephen Webb, am Sonntag, 27. Dezember 2020 um 01:58 schrieben Sie: > The doxygen style is looking a bit old now - could we move to Doxygen + > Breath + Sphinx? I suggest to NOT start introducing more dependencies at this point, which might result in trouble under different platforms an

Re: [log4cxx] Site / Release?

You should not need to run the build to generate the web site on multiple platforms and I would think that the build to generate web site documentation would be separate from performing the release build. That said, I haven’t looked at the log4cxx build so I am not at all familiar with it. Ral

Re: [log4cxx] Site / Release?

> I'm somewhat sure to try your changes on my > Windows as well, which might lead to additional changes, which might > make the release with included changes obsolete already. I would be curious to know how things work for you. I think that I've avoided a lot of the C++14 and C++17 features, but

Re: [log4cxx] Site / Release?

Guten Tag Robert Middleton, am Dienstag, 29. Dezember 2020 um 23:54 schrieben Sie: > I would be curious to know how things work for you. I think that I've > avoided a lot of the C++14 and C++17 features, but some may have snuck > in(although from looking at the Embarcadero wiki any recent version

Re: [log4cxx] Site / Release?

> I'm using C++Builder 10.2 with the legacy compiler currently, that > surely doesn't support C++14 or 17. So what should I test? Do you want > to create a DRAFT-PR on GitHub or tell me some special branch in your > fork or ...? The DRAFT seems like the easiest approach. Sure, I'll do that in a li

Re: [log4cxx] Site / Release?

Guten Tag Robert Middleton, am Mittwoch, 30. Dezember 2020 um 15:18 schrieben Sie: > I also have a separate branch for the documentation updates, which > should be ready at this point. Then let's have a look at this one first. Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Thorsten Schöning -- Thorsten Schöning AM