On Thu, 23 Apr 2009, Bill Janssen wrote:
Renaming build.xml to something more obscure could be done.
Would you like to send in a patch ?
Didn't I just do that :-? No, I'll let you deal with it.
Done.
Andi..
On Apr 23, 2009, at 13:15, Bill Janssen wrote:
Andi Vajda wrote:
If Apache Forrest, which is used to produce the web site, can be
used to
generate plain text, then this should be used for sure. What I
don't want
to do is maintain two versions of the docs, even one pagers.
No, of cours
Andi Vajda wrote:
> If Apache Forrest, which is used to produce the web site, can be used to
> generate plain text, then this should be used for sure. What I don't want
> to do is maintain two versions of the docs, even one pagers.
No, of course not. That's why I use ReST for the UpLib docs.
On Thu, 23 Apr 2009, Bill Janssen wrote:
I've just tried installing 2.4.1, and I've got a few suggestions for
packaging.
1. Put a plain-text version of readme.html in README, automatically
generated from readme.html (or whatever), as part of the src-dist
build process. I always hate it wh
I've just tried installing 2.4.1, and I've got a few suggestions for
packaging.
1. Put a plain-text version of readme.html in README, automatically
generated from readme.html (or whatever), as part of the src-dist
build process. I always hate it when I visit a README, and it says,
"You f
