+1 for only having to use one tool +1 for being able to customize L&F I guess that makes me +1 for Maven, but that's qualified by the fact that I haven't used either so I don't know what bumps we'll hit down the road.
As long as we can produce valid XHTML and customize the L&F I'll be happy. Steve > -----Original Message----- > From: Craig R. McClanahan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: September 6, 2003 11:13 AM > To: Struts Developers List; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Struts web site [was: Re: Conversion of web site docs to > XHTML] > > > On Sat, 6 Sep 2003, David Graham wrote: > > > Date: Sat, 6 Sep 2003 10:55:26 -0700 (PDT) > > From: David Graham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Reply-To: Struts Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > To: Struts Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Subject: Re: Struts web site [was: Re: Conversion of web site docs to > > XHTML] > > > > > > --- Ted Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Robert Leland wrote: > > > > Do we want to hold a formal vote/lazy consensus on what doc > > > > system we are moving to ? > > > > > > Don already put the Struts SourceForge site on Forrest, so I > would lean > > > in that direction. > > > > Does Forrest require that look and feel? If so, I'm -1 only because it > > doesn't match the new Jakarta look and feel. I think Struts > should fit in > > with other Jakarta sites. Also, it seems like most other > Jakarta projects > > are using Maven so maybe we should too. > > > > Strictly from the selfish point of view of a developer wanting to minimize > how many tools I have to use, I'd prefer Maven over Forrest simply because > it's also a build system. Or, to put it anothe way, using Maven as a > build system will give us a website/docs publishing system for free. > > Visually, I'm not a huge fan of either system's default L&F, but I don't > dislike either of them enough to vote -1 on that basis. My understanding > is that there is some room for customization with either, though, if we > wanted to expend the effort to manage our own L&F. > > The argument for consistency with other Jakarta subprojects > is good in theory, but I don't see most Jakarta subproject websites using > either yet -- at least for their pages on jakarta.apache.org. It would > also not be an issue if we ever wanted to become a top-level Apache > project (like Maven and Ant did), versus staying under Jakarta. > > > David > > Craig > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
