On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 3:04 AM, Olivier Lamy <ol...@apache.org> wrote:
> Apologize for delayed response. > > 2013/6/26 Jeremy Boynes <jboy...@apache.org>: > > On Jun 25, 2013, at 7:54 AM, Henri Yandell <flame...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> Help much appreciated - but do we want all the content of all the > modules > >> to be there? > >> > >> It feels to me that the website does not map directly to the codebase. > We > >> want an overall site, and subsites for Standard and for RDC. We don't > want > >> to have the 14 pom.xmls become a site structure, or the 4 pom.xmls > >> (tld-generator and extended). > > > > Three mini-sites sounds good: a top-level one holding things together > and then sub-sites for standard and RDC. Is there a way to associate the > top-level one with the parent POM and the others with the "root" poms in > standard and rdc? That would match with the things that are likely to be > released (being all "standard" packages together, or all "rdc" packages > together, but not both at the same time). Do we still need an aggregator > pom as well - how about setting up separate CI jobs for "standard" and > "rdc"? > > > > Coud be possible but do you want to deploy sites from tagged modules > versions ? (I presume yes). > In such case that will changed a bit as all modules will be in a > different svn path. > Apologies for no change on this - I've spent the week with flu. I wouldn't expect to deploy the site from tags - a site is a live/current thing. Hen
