commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From __matthewHawthorne <>
Subject Re: [all] STATUS.html vs. Maven xdocs
Date Mon, 22 Sep 2003 02:47:46 GMT
You're right, I hadn't thought of the fact that all projects may not be 
using maven.  It wouldn't seem right for the commons charter to require 
projects to build with maven.

My primary complaint is the difficulty in keeping developer lists and 
task lists in sync between maven files and the STATUS.html file.  One 
possibility would be a small maven plugin to generate STATUS.html files, 
but that may be overkill as opposed to just doing some small cut and 

If anyone is going to contribute to a project, they need to grab the 
sources anyway, so they will be able to acess the STATUS.html just as 
easily as a maven generated site.

robert burrell donkin wrote:
> 1. not all components are mavenized.
> 2. STATUS.html files are mandated by our charter so probably we'd need a 
> vote to remove them completely. the main purpose of the STATUS file is 
> to keep track of which committers are involved with that particular 
> component.
> - robert
> On Sunday, September 21, 2003, at 07:16 PM, __matthewHawthorne wrote:
>> With the acceptance of Maven as a build system, hasn't the use of STATUS.
>> html to maintain lists of developers and tasks become outdated?
>> It seems more desirable to keep the list of developers in the 
>> project.xml to be displayed on the site, and also to create a 
>> xdocs/tasks.xml (or something similar) to keep track of action items.
>> This way, everything you ever wanted to know about a project is in the 
>> Maven site documentation.
>> Is there any particular reason to continue the maintenence of 
>> STATUS.html files?
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>> For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message