I have one request and that is to leave the existing maven files in place since they do currently generate a web site with the reports.
Craig R. McClanahan wrote:
Don Brown wrote:
I know the discussion on whether to use Forrest or Maven to generate theLooking at the potential here, I'm inclined to suggest we accept Don's offer to help set this up -- although perhaps at first in a standalone directory structure that can be undone if we discover that we don't like it. One advantage is that we can do it without having to migrate the build system to Maven first.
Struts website was a few weeks back, but unfortunately, at the time, I was
too busy to participate. I'd like to lay out a case for Forrest, not to
insist Struts uses it, but rather to make sure the decision is made with
all the available information.
In short, Forrest offers these benefits over Maven's website generation:
- Multiple output formats including PDF and HTML - SVG to PNG rendering - Built for handling and aggregating multiple XML sources like RRS (soon wiki and Docbook) - Power and features of Cocoon including charting, web services integration, scripting support, etc.
Further, deciding between Forrest and Maven isn't an either/or situation.
There exists a Forrest plugin for Maven and it would be easy to integrate
Maven's reports into a Forrest site build.
To me, the key feature of Forrest is the first one listed, multiple outputs. This is especially useful for documentation as PDF is much better than HTML for printing for the many users that like hard copies.
Finally, Forrest content is built to be presented in not only multiple
output formats, but multiple skins. To demonstrate this, I've quickly
redone the Struts site into Forrest format (which is very similiar to the
current format thanks to the xhtml work of late). I've only converted the
menu and the main page, which should be sufficient.
Please note, this examples are not polished and only serve to demonstrate
the skinability of Forrest.
Krysalis style: http://www.twdata.org/dakine/site/ Avalon/Tigris style: http://www.twdata.org/dakine/site1/ Forrest/XML Apache style: http://www.twdata.org/dakine/site2/
If we did decide to go with Forrest, I'm willing to convert the old site
over and help handle any integration. I'm most definately not an expert
at Forrest, but am familiar with Cocoon and thankfully, Forrest is pretty
easy.
As for skins, I sure like the Avalon/Tigris or Krysalis examples, and sure wonder why the Forrest developers chose the native style they ship with, when they could do something as nice looking as either of these. But, if I understand what you're saying, skins is essentially a runtime (when you're generating the HTML) choice; we don't have to make an irrevocable decision at any point in time.
DonCraig
--------------------------------------------------------------------- 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]
