On 2010-03-13 20:50, Niall Pemberton wrote: > On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 6:59 PM, Dennis Lundberg <denn...@apache.org> wrote: >> On 2010-03-13 18:35, Niall Pemberton wrote: >>> On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 5:04 PM, Dennis Lundberg <denn...@apache.org> wrote: >>>> On 2010-03-13 17:58, Niall Pemberton wrote: >>>>> On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 4:52 PM, Dennis Lundberg <denn...@apache.org> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> On 2010-03-13 17:33, Niall Pemberton wrote: >>>>>>> On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 4:24 PM, Dennis Lundberg <denn...@apache.org> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> On 2010-03-13 16:54, Niall Pemberton wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 3:39 PM, Dennis Lundberg <denn...@apache.org> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 2010-03-12 11:34, Niall Pemberton wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 3:12 AM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> On 12/03/2010, Niall Pemberton <niall.pember...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 2:07 AM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> > On 12/03/2010, Niall Pemberton <niall.pember...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> I have created a m2 site for Commons[1][2] as (hopefully) a >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> replacement for the m1 site[3] that we currently have - you >>>>>>>>>>>>> can see it >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> here: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> http://people.apache.org/~niallp/commons/ >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> IMO its a PITA to have to switch to m1 to build the commons >>>>>>>>>>>>> site and >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> its time to move to m2. >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > +1, thanks for doing this. >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> * The new releases page[4] points to the download pages on >>>>>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> components' sites (removing the need for the current XSLT >>>>>>>>>>>>> ant task to >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> generate the downloads) >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> * I've put PMC members in the pom - so we have a page >>>>>>>>>>>>> showing them[5] >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> Feel free to jump in and correct/improve anything. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> Opinions/feedback on switching from the old m1 site to this >>>>>>>>>>>>> m2 site >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> would be welcome. If anyone objects please shout or I'll >>>>>>>>>>>>> assume people >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> are OK with this. >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > There seem to be rather too many links marked as "external". I >>>>>>>>>>>>> don't >>>>>>>>>>>>> > know if this is a side effect of creating a demo build or >>>>>>>>>>>>> whether this >>>>>>>>>>>>> > would be seen in a live deployment - if so, then this needs to >>>>>>>>>>>>> be >>>>>>>>>>>>> > fixed. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> OK fixed alot of them - some of these links are now broken on my >>>>>>>>>>>>> *demo* site - but would be fine once deployed to the normal >>>>>>>>>>>>> location: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks! >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> BTW, I updated the parent pom.xml in trunk to get rid of the <post> >>>>>>>>>>>> links for Commits and Issues. Just noticed that Announce is missing >>>>>>>>>>>> from the list ;-) >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> The Surefire report is not relevant - and is confusing - but I >>>>>>>>>>>> could >>>>>>>>>>>> not work out how to get rid of it. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I've changed the pom's parent from commons-parent to apache - this >>>>>>>>>>> means we don't inherit the reports specified (such as surefure) and >>>>>>>>>>> also the site.xml. Not inheriting site.xml from commons-parent gives >>>>>>>>>>> us more control over the main sites navigation. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> We could move all the reposting stuff in commons parent to a >>>>>>>>>> "reporting" >>>>>>>>>> profile. This is a common way to achieve two things: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> - Make the build faster if you don't want the reports >>>>>>>>>> - Prevent some children (like commons-site) from inheriting stuff >>>>>>>>>> unless >>>>>>>>>> you explicitly activate the profile >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> The only drawback is that you need to supply the -Preporting >>>>>>>>>> parameter >>>>>>>>>> when you deploy the site, but this can easily be documented in our >>>>>>>>>> release instructions. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I can help with this if you think it's a good idea. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I think the small amount of duplication (mailing list information) is >>>>>>>>> probably better. It also didn't work out that well inheriting the >>>>>>>>> site.xml from commons-proper. The old m1 site had expanding menus for >>>>>>>>> components/sandbox/dormant. We don't want to put that in the >>>>>>>>> commons-parent site.xml as it would mean we needed to release >>>>>>>>> commons-parent every time we wanted to do a menu change for a new >>>>>>>>> module - or moved module. Also there is less control over the main >>>>>>>>> site menu - because it needs to be geared towards being inherited by >>>>>>>>> components - this way we are freed up to have a slightly different >>>>>>>>> menu - no constrained by what modules require. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I understand. We could create another POM project to handle this. Move >>>>>>>> the stuff that is only interesting for components to a >>>>>>>> commons-component-parent and let all our components inherit from that >>>>>>>> POM. What is left in commons-parent should work well for commons-site >>>>>>>> and other non-components that might occur. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> commons-parent (minus reporting and component-specific navigation) >>>>>>>> | >>>>>>>> +-- commons-site >>>>>>>> | >>>>>>>> +-- commons-component (reporting and component-specific navigation) >>>>>>>> | >>>>>>>> +-- commons-bar >>>>>>>> | >>>>>>>> +-- commons-foo >>>>>>>> ... >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The disadvantage of this is that we now would have two parent poms >>>>>>> that we need to release but besides that I don't see how this is any >>>>>>> better than just having commons-site inherit directly from Apache >>>>>>> parent. >>>>>> >>>>>> With reporting and component-specific navigation removed from >>>>>> commons-parent, I see that POM having fewer releases going forward. >>>>> >>>>> It would still mean an additional pom to release though. >>>> >>>> Yes it would. >>>> >>>>>> The benefit of this setup is that you get a clear separation between >>>>>> what is needed for Commons components and other Commons projects. >>>>> >>>>> What other commons projects - besides the main site? >>>> >>>> commons-build >>> >>> This is an m1 project, so doesn't apply. >>> >>>> commons-build-plugin >>> >>> This is like a component so will always inherit from the same pom as >>> components. >>> >>>> commons-skin >>> >>> Skin is just a set of resources - I can't see how this would benefit >>> at all from inheriting from some *reporting* pom? >> >> Right, that's why commons-skin would inherit from the POM that has no >> reporting in it, namely the new commons-parent. > > OK but how does that benefit commons-skin?
If we at some point would decide to give commons-skin its own site, then that site wouldn't have a pointless Surefire report and the navigation wouldn't have the usual component links in it. > > Niall > >>> >>> Niall >>> >>>>>>> In fact since we never release commons-site - then not having >>>>>>> to depend on anything else we release seems like a big advantage to >>>>>>> me. >>>>>> >>>>>> Since commons-site is constantly evolving and deployed you don't >>>>>> necessarily need for it to have a non-SNAPSHOT parent when you deploy >>>>>> it. So the number of ancestors in the POM hierarchy should not matter. >>>>> >>>>> True, but for commons-site it is very simple. >>>>> >>>>>>> Also as I said before the duplication is very minimal and what is >>>>>>> there now in commons-site is very straight forward. So I don't see any >>>>>>> advantage in over-complicating this and the rest of our parent pom >>>>>>> structure. >>>>>> >>>>>> I don't see this as complicating things, on the contrary, it is meant to >>>>>> make things less complicated and more clear. Compare this to how you >>>>>> would use inheritance in Java. >>>>> >>>>> Its an extra pom just to remove the duplication of mailing list info. >>>>> One less layer in our pom hierarchy for components is a good thing >>>>> IMO. Having two commons pom ancestors for components is going in the >>>>> wrong direction IMO and for virtually no benefit. >>>>> >>>>> Niall >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Niall >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Niall >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Niall >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~niallp/commons/ >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=922120 >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> Niall >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> [1] >>>>>>>>>>>>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=922094 >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> [2] http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/commons/proper/commons-site/ >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> [3] >>>>>>>>>>>>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/commons/proper/commons-build/trunk/ >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> [4] >>>>>>>>>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~niallp/commons/downloads/index.html >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Still shows external links for me. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> [5] http://people.apache.org/~niallp/commons/team-list.html >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > > -- Dennis Lundberg --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
