Salut,
we have'nt concluded on that. What should we do? Something like:
trunk/www
trunk/project_grizzly
?
A+
-- Jeanfrancois
Oleksiy Stashok wrote:
> Hi,
>>
>> I don't what requirements dev.java.net <http://dev.java.net> forces on
>> projects, but
>> would it be possible to move this content to same level as
>> trunk/tags/branches?
>> This would allow all tools to treat our code repository as standard
>> SVN setup.
>>
>> So svn tree would look like:
>> + / (root)
>> |_trunk/
>> |_tags/
>> |_branches/
>> \_site/
>
> I think it is not possible. The only solution I see now is to use
> directory structure you proposed before, in other words have Grizzly
> modules under SVN/trunk/code .
>
> WBR,
> Alexey.
>
>>
>> I don't know if this is possible, dev.java.net <http://dev.java.net>
>> might require site content to be under /trunk.
>>
>> H.
>> On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 4:38 PM, Jeanfrancois Arcand
>> <Jeanfrancois.Arcand_at_sun.com <mailto:Jeanfrancois.Arcand_at_sun.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Salut,
>>
>> Jason Lee wrote:
>>
>> On Feb 5, 2009, at 9:04 AM, Jeanfrancois Arcand wrote:
>>
>> Hubert Iwaniuk wrote:
>>
>> Jeanfrancois could say something about trunk/www and
>> trunk/www/apidocs ?
>>
>>
>> This is the javadocs/xdoc published for
>> grizzly.dev.java.net <http://grizzly.dev.java.net>:
>>
>> https://grizzly.dev.java.net/nonav/apidocs/index.html
>>
>> All java.net <http://java.net> works like that I suspect.
>> Is there a way to exclude this folder from svn checkout?
>>
>>
>> The main way to manage a project's web site is by putting
>> files in www/ in the root of the project's source control (be
>> it CVS or SVN). I would imagine most users want the code and
>> not the www stuff, so what I did with my java.net
>> <http://java.net> project (and what I've seen with others) is
>> to have www/ and code/ (for example). People interested in
>> only code, then, would checkout
>> https://<project>.dev.java.net/svn/
>> <http://dev.java.net/svn/><project>/trunk/code.
>>
>> It's still ugly, but when life hands you lemons... :P
>>
>>
>> I agree adding a /code/ might makes the build much more simple to
>> checkout. What others think?
>>
>> A=
>>
>> -- Jeanfrancois
>>
>