lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Doron Cohen" <cdor...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: formatable changes log
Date Sat, 26 Jan 2008 00:28:09 GMT
On Jan 25, 2008 1:28 PM, Doron Cohen <cdoronc@gmail.com> wrote:

> I'll check it, thanks Michael.
>
> On Jan 25, 2008 3:03 AM, Michael Busch <buschmic@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Forrest has a plugin called projectInfo that can generate a list of
> > changes and an RSS feed from a status.xml file:
> >
> >
> > http://forrest.apache.org/pluginDocs/plugins_0_80/org.apache.forrest.plugin.input.projectInfo/index.html
> >
> > Maybe we should use that?
> >
> > -Michael
> >
>
I checked this plugin - it is nice and powerful alright.
But also IMHO somewhat cumbersome to use:

- Need to define all developers/committers in front and assign each an ID,
and use this ID when referring to them. I guess we can ignore this practice
and just continue to put text - i.e.either (Person1) or (Person1 via
Person2). And BTW, AFAICT for now it does not support that P1 via P2 concept
(though that can be requested as a new feature).

- Need to run forrest in order to see the result. It would then create both
PDF and HTML files (per our settings).

The status.xml that needs to be maintained can be reviewed in
http://people.apache.org/~doronc/status.xml - only two issues there now, but
one can get the picture what it would take to maintain this file.

The result of this file can reviewed in
http://people.apache.org/~doronc/site/ - see the new "Changes" link below
"Overview". It is very rich, though I think there is less flexibility in
formatting the issues, and with a very long file the ability to fold
sections is missing (there might be an option for that too that I didn't
find, or it may be requested...)

To me the main disadvantage of using this is the need to run forrest with
every commit to review the updated changes.html/pdf which I think is almost
too much. Personally I am not very fond of editing XML files, but perhaps
others are. (Editing the html file is not as simple as editing the txt file,
but still I think way simpler than the XML.)

So my preference so far is the HTML version, with a stylesheet(s).

What do others think about this?

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message