lucenenet-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Troy Howard <thowar...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [Lucene.Net] 2.9.4
Date Wed, 21 Sep 2011 04:56:12 GMT
Why would we want to do that?

Under the /site/docs directory, they need to be served up as loose HTML...

IMO the XML files shouldn't be checked into SVN because they are
auto-generated. The same goes for Sandcastle files.. However, in the
release packages, I think we should include the XML files as well as a
fully functional version of the Sandcastle docs that can be viewed
locally. I personally thing CHMs are terrible user experience, and I'd
much rather have a static HTML site I can browse locally, if we're
going to bother including a copy of the documentation in the package,
vs just hosting it online and calling that good (this is what most
projects these days do). Good thing about hosting online -- searchable
via google.

Thanks,
Troy


On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 9:48 PM, Michael Herndon
<mherndon@wickedsoftware.net> wrote:
> Could we store sandcastle docs as a single zip/chm?
>
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 12:37 AM, Troy Howard <thoward37@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> At one time I had a SVN server set up at work that had a post-commit
>> hook set up that would generate a static HTML site from the XML doc
>> files using Sandcastle. So.. It can be done. That was about 3-4 years
>> ago and I don't work at that company any longer, so I don't have
>> access to the details of how that was done.
>>
>> Regarding SVN locations...
>>
>> Autogenerated XML doc files should go in the ~/trunk/doc/<component>
>> folders. The Sandcastle generated static HTML should go under
>> ~/site/docs/<version> folders.
>>
>> I'll see if I can't dig up some info on how to generate static HTML
>> with Sandcastle.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Troy
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 9:15 PM, Michael Herndon
>> <mherndon@wickedsoftware.net> wrote:
>> >>We have a folder /trunk/docs, shouldn't this be the place for that?
>> >
>> > We should have a live site for the documentation that people can browse,
>> > similar to the parent project's site.
>> > http://lucene.apache.org/java/3_4_0/api/all/index.html. It makes it the
>> > documentation more accessible.
>> >
>> > The rub is that Sandcastle & SHFB generates html files with guid names,
>> xml
>> > & bin files that map to the html files, and aspx pages which acts as the
>> > glue. The aspx pages parses the xml/bin files which creates the document
>> > site.  Thus we're now required to use a server that knows how to serve up
>> > aspx pages.
>> >
>> > If any one knows a way to generate just vanilla html using Sandcastle &
>> > SHFB, I could just create a folder per version and push the docs to
>> > incubator site. But so far I haven't found an option for this.
>> >
>> > Keeping the generated help docs inside of source would still require for
>> > users to setup a local website just to view the documentation and it adds
>> > extra noise in the project.
>> >
>> > In the release we can provide a zipped file of the site and a generated
>> .chm
>> > or even help2/3 files.
>> >
>> > On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 11:38 PM, Prescott Nasser <geobmx540@hotmail.com
>> >wrote:
>> >
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > We should probably fix the ClsCompliance warnings if they have not
>> >> already
>> >> > been fixed
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> We will have some issues with this - some are marked volatile - which
>> >> basically have to be a non-CLS compliant type (as far as my research is
>> >> finding) Anyone have thoughts? I went through and replaced sbyte ->
>> Int16,
>> >> and uint -> Int64, but I'm having an issue with this, and I don't think
>> >> removing the volatile keyword is the right solution.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> > find a place to put the generated documentation.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> We have a folder /trunk/docs, shouldn't this be the place for that?
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > I remember someone mentioning he/she was unable to access a class from
>> >> > VB.NET. The class had public fields & properties with the same
names
>> but
>> >> > different casing. The fields should be private.
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> > The link in the readme is a dead link:
>> >> > http://lucene.apache.org/lucene.net/docs/2.4.0/ The docs generated
by
>> >> > sandcastle & SHFB require a server that allows aspx files to be
>> executed.
>> >> > We should either remove the link from the readme or find the docs a
>> new
>> >> > home and update the link.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> We should generate new documentation and update the link
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > I'll see if I can setup automating Lucene.Net <http://lucene.net>
>> nuget
>> >> > package creation for trunk in the next day or so.
>> >> >
>> >> > - Michael
>> >> >
>> >> > On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 5:48 PM, Prescott Nasser <
>> geobmx540@hotmail.com
>> >> >wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > > Hey all seems like we are set with 2.9.4? Feedback has been positive
>> >> and
>> >> > > its been quiet. Do we feel ready to vote for a new release?
>> >> > >
>> >> > > -Prescott
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Sent from my Windows Phone
>> >>
>> >
>>
>

Mime
View raw message