some comments on the 10.4 beta distribution

[Rick Hillegas-2]

I have downloaded the source distribution of the 10.4 beta and have a
couple comments. After unpacking this distribution, I was able to build
the docs and I was able to generate a release. The links from index.html
worked. So the structure of the beta looks good to me. The release notes
looked sketchy, but I've already sent mail about that. In addition, the
following looked odd:

o In the user guides, should "Copyright 2004-2007" be changed to
"Copyright 2004-2008"?

o The version number in the user documentation is 10.3, not 10.4

o In the JDBC3 public api, there's a spurious line just before the title
of the top-left frame. The line reads: 'Apache Derby 10.4 API
Documentation">'

o The NOTICE file says "Copyright 2004-2007". Should that be changed to
"Copyright 2004-2008"?

Thanks,
-Rick

[Kim Haase]

Good catches, Rick. Should there be a a JIRA issue for this? Or perhaps
more than one? I think only the first two are specific to the docs.
Also, which NOTICE are we talking about? The one in the code trunk seems
to have been updated, and the one in the docs trunk doesn't have a
copyright notice.

Kim

Rick Hillegas wrote:

> I have downloaded the source distribution of the 10.4 beta and have a
> couple comments. After unpacking this distribution, I was able to build
> the docs and I was able to generate a release. The links from index.html
> worked. So the structure of the beta looks good to me. The release notes
> looked sketchy, but I've already sent mail about that. In addition, the
> following looked odd:
>
> o In the user guides, should "Copyright 2004-2007" be changed to
> "Copyright 2004-2008"?
>
> o The version number in the user documentation is 10.3, not 10.4
>
> o In the JDBC3 public api, there's a spurious line just before the title
> of the top-left frame. The line reads: 'Apache Derby 10.4 API
> Documentation">'
>
> o The NOTICE file says "Copyright 2004-2007". Should that be changed to
> "Copyright 2004-2008"?
>
> Thanks,
> -Rick

[Dyre Tjeldvoll]

Kim Haase <Camilla.Haase@...> writes:

> Good catches, Rick. Should there be a a JIRA issue for this? Or
> perhaps more than one? I think only the first two are specific to the
> docs. Also, which NOTICE are we talking about? The one in the code
> trunk seems to have been updated, and the one in the docs trunk
> doesn't have a copyright notice.

I'm wondering how much of this is covered by step 1 under
'Check-ins just before generating release artifacts' in the relase
instructions on the Wiki:

http://wiki.apache.org/db-derby/DerbySnapshotOrRelease

I didn't do that for the beta, since it is listed as something you do
when creating the release candidate. But I guess those files might as well have
been updated right after cutting the branch... (and possibly updated
later).

>
> Kim
>
> Rick Hillegas wrote:
>> I have downloaded the source distribution of the 10.4 beta and have
>> a couple comments. After unpacking this distribution, I was able to
>> build the docs and I was able to generate a release. The links from
>> index.html worked. So the structure of the beta looks good to
>> me. The release notes looked sketchy, but I've already sent mail
>> about that. In addition, the following looked odd:
>>
>> o In the user guides, should "Copyright 2004-2007" be changed to
>> "Copyright 2004-2008"?
>>
>> o The version number in the user documentation is 10.3, not 10.4
>>
>> o In the JDBC3 public api, there's a spurious line just before the
>> title of the top-left frame. The line reads: 'Apache Derby 10.4 API
>> Documentation">'
>>
>> o The NOTICE file says "Copyright 2004-2007". Should that be changed
>> to "Copyright 2004-2008"?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> -Rick
>

--
dt

[Dyre Tjeldvoll]

Dyre.Tjeldvoll@... writes:

> Kim Haase <Camilla.Haase@...> writes:
>
>> Good catches, Rick. Should there be a a JIRA issue for this? Or
>> perhaps more than one? I think only the first two are specific to the
>> docs. Also, which NOTICE are we talking about? The one in the code
>> trunk seems to have been updated, and the one in the docs trunk
>> doesn't have a copyright notice.
>
> I'm wondering how much of this is covered by step 1 under
> 'Check-ins just before generating release artifacts' in the relase
> instructions on the Wiki:
>
> http://wiki.apache.org/db-derby/DerbySnapshotOrRelease

Those instructions are actually a bit terse. The actual wording is

"Also adjust version numbers in documentation by modifying the
appropriate *conrefs.dita files."

There are actually a number of such files

dt136804@khepri32~/derby/docs-10.4$ find . -name '*conrefs.dita'
./src/ja_JP/getstart/gsconrefs.dita
./src/ja_JP/conrefs.dita
./src/pt_BR/adminguide/adminconrefs.dita
./src/pt_BR/ref/refconrefs.dita
./src/pt_BR/getstart/gsconrefs.dita
./src/conrefs.dita
./conrefs.dita

I assume that only those under src are of interest. Seems only two files
actually conatin the string '10.3':
M      src/conrefs.dita
M      src/ja_JP/conrefs.dita

If that's all that needs to be done, I can check in the change.

>
> I didn't do that for the beta, since it is listed as something you do
> when creating the release candidate. But I guess those files might as well have
> been updated right after cutting the branch... (and possibly updated
> later).

>
>>
>> Kim
>>
>> Rick Hillegas wrote:
>>> I have downloaded the source distribution of the 10.4 beta and have
>>> a couple comments. After unpacking this distribution, I was able to
>>> build the docs and I was able to generate a release. The links from
>>> index.html worked. So the structure of the beta looks good to
>>> me. The release notes looked sketchy, but I've already sent mail
>>> about that. In addition, the following looked odd:
>>>
>>> o In the user guides, should "Copyright 2004-2007" be changed to
>>> "Copyright 2004-2008"?
>>>
>>> o The version number in the user documentation is 10.3, not 10.4
>>>
>>> o In the JDBC3 public api, there's a spurious line just before the
>>> title of the top-left frame. The line reads: 'Apache Derby 10.4 API
>>> Documentation">'
>>>
>>> o The NOTICE file says "Copyright 2004-2007". Should that be changed
>>> to "Copyright 2004-2008"?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> -Rick
>>
>
> --
> dt
>

--
dt

[Dyre Tjeldvoll]

Dyre.Tjeldvoll@... writes:

> Dyre.Tjeldvoll@... writes:
>
>> Kim Haase <Camilla.Haase@...> writes:
>>
>>> Good catches, Rick. Should there be a a JIRA issue for this? Or
>>> perhaps more than one? I think only the first two are specific to the
>>> docs. Also, which NOTICE are we talking about? The one in the code
>>> trunk seems to have been updated, and the one in the docs trunk
>>> doesn't have a copyright notice.
>>
>> I'm wondering how much of this is covered by step 1 under
>> 'Check-ins just before generating release artifacts' in the relase
>> instructions on the Wiki:
>>
>> http://wiki.apache.org/db-derby/DerbySnapshotOrRelease
>
> Those instructions are actually a bit terse. The actual wording is
>
> "Also adjust version numbers in documentation by modifying the
> appropriate *conrefs.dita files."
>
> There are actually a number of such files
>
> dt136804@khepri32~/derby/docs-10.4$ find . -name '*conrefs.dita'
> ./src/ja_JP/getstart/gsconrefs.dita
> ./src/ja_JP/conrefs.dita
> ./src/pt_BR/adminguide/adminconrefs.dita
> ./src/pt_BR/ref/refconrefs.dita
> ./src/pt_BR/getstart/gsconrefs.dita
> ./src/conrefs.dita
> ./conrefs.dita
>
> I assume that only those under src are of interest. Seems only two files
> actually conatin the string '10.3':
> M      src/conrefs.dita
> M      src/ja_JP/conrefs.dita
>
> If that's all that needs to be done, I can check in the change.

Actually, I can't because I can no longer build the 10.4 doc branch. I
was trying to figure out what had happened, but now svn seems to be
down...

--
dt

[Dyre Tjeldvoll]

Dyre.Tjeldvoll@... writes:

> Dyre.Tjeldvoll@... writes:
>
>> Dyre.Tjeldvoll@... writes:
>>
>>> Kim Haase <Camilla.Haase@...> writes:
>>>
>>>> Good catches, Rick. Should there be a a JIRA issue for this? Or
>>>> perhaps more than one? I think only the first two are specific to the
>>>> docs. Also, which NOTICE are we talking about? The one in the code
>>>> trunk seems to have been updated, and the one in the docs trunk
>>>> doesn't have a copyright notice.
>>>
>>> I'm wondering how much of this is covered by step 1 under
>>> 'Check-ins just before generating release artifacts' in the relase
>>> instructions on the Wiki:
>>>
>>> http://wiki.apache.org/db-derby/DerbySnapshotOrRelease
>>
>> Those instructions are actually a bit terse. The actual wording is
>>
>> "Also adjust version numbers in documentation by modifying the
>> appropriate *conrefs.dita files."
>>
>> There are actually a number of such files
>>
>> dt136804@khepri32~/derby/docs-10.4$ find . -name '*conrefs.dita'
>> ./src/ja_JP/getstart/gsconrefs.dita
>> ./src/ja_JP/conrefs.dita
>> ./src/pt_BR/adminguide/adminconrefs.dita
>> ./src/pt_BR/ref/refconrefs.dita
>> ./src/pt_BR/getstart/gsconrefs.dita
>> ./src/conrefs.dita
>> ./conrefs.dita
>>
>> I assume that only those under src are of interest. Seems only two files
>> actually conatin the string '10.3':
>> M      src/conrefs.dita
>> M      src/ja_JP/conrefs.dita
>>
>> If that's all that needs to be done, I can check in the change.
>
> Actually, I can't because I can no longer build the 10.4 doc branch. I
> was trying to figure out what had happened, but now svn seems to be
> down...

svn is back up and it seems like the following revision introduced the
problem:

dt136804@khepri32~/derby/docs-10.4$ svn log -r 641931
------------------------------------------------------------------------
r641931 | chaase3 | 2008-03-27 19:15:04 +0100 (Thu, 27 Mar 2008) | 4 lines

DERBY-3169: Add documentation for replication

New files for Admin Guide, Reference Manual, Tuning Derby; modified Derby properties table in Tuning Guide.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Do I need a new DITA version or something to build after this?

The error message I get is:

BUILD FAILED
/export/home/tmp/derby/docs-10.4/build.xml:196: The following error occurred while executing this line:
/export/home/tmp/derby/docs-10.4/build.xml:215: The following error occurred while executing this line:
/export/home/tmp/derby/docs-10.4/DITA-OT1.1.2.1/conductor.xml:209: The following error occurred while executing this line:
/export/home/tmp/derby/docs-10.4/DITA-OT1.1.2.1/ditatargets.xml:78: javax.xml.transform.TransformerException: org.apache.fop.fo.ValidationException: file:///export/home/tmp/derby/docs-10.4/out/ref/refderby.fo:6749:258: Error(6749/258): fo:basic-link, Missing attribute:  Either external-destination or internal-destination must be specified.

Total time: 8 minutes 40 seconds

--
dt

[Kim Haase]

Oh no ... I see the failure too.

I found the problem -- I have incorrect capital letters in a
cross-reference in src/ref/rrefattribstartmaster.dita:

<i><xref
href="rrefattribslaveHost.dita#rrefattribslaveHost">slaveHost=hostname</xref></i>

I'm really sorry -- I mostly test on Windows, where the docs build twice
as fast as on my Solaris box (dare I admit?), and where the problem does
not occur. On Solaris I have been doing a sanity test just building the
HTML, and the problem does not occur there either. Now I know to make
sure to build the doc completely on a Unix box before checking in.

I will make the fix. DERBY-3169 is still open for additional changes.

Kim

Dyre.Tjeldvoll@... wrote:

> Dyre.Tjeldvoll@... writes:
>
>> Dyre.Tjeldvoll@... writes:
>>
>>> Dyre.Tjeldvoll@... writes:
>>>
>>>> Kim Haase <Camilla.Haase@...> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> Good catches, Rick. Should there be a a JIRA issue for this? Or
>>>>> perhaps more than one? I think only the first two are specific to the
>>>>> docs. Also, which NOTICE are we talking about? The one in the code
>>>>> trunk seems to have been updated, and the one in the docs trunk
>>>>> doesn't have a copyright notice.
>>>> I'm wondering how much of this is covered by step 1 under
>>>> 'Check-ins just before generating release artifacts' in the relase
>>>> instructions on the Wiki:
>>>>
>>>> http://wiki.apache.org/db-derby/DerbySnapshotOrRelease
>>> Those instructions are actually a bit terse. The actual wording is
>>>
>>> "Also adjust version numbers in documentation by modifying the
>>> appropriate *conrefs.dita files."
>>>
>>> There are actually a number of such files
>>>
>>> dt136804@khepri32~/derby/docs-10.4$ find . -name '*conrefs.dita'
>>> ./src/ja_JP/getstart/gsconrefs.dita
>>> ./src/ja_JP/conrefs.dita
>>> ./src/pt_BR/adminguide/adminconrefs.dita
>>> ./src/pt_BR/ref/refconrefs.dita
>>> ./src/pt_BR/getstart/gsconrefs.dita
>>> ./src/conrefs.dita
>>> ./conrefs.dita
>>>
>>> I assume that only those under src are of interest. Seems only two files
>>> actually conatin the string '10.3':
>>> M      src/conrefs.dita
>>> M      src/ja_JP/conrefs.dita
>>>
>>> If that's all that needs to be done, I can check in the change.
>> Actually, I can't because I can no longer build the 10.4 doc branch. I
>> was trying to figure out what had happened, but now svn seems to be
>> down...
>
> svn is back up and it seems like the following revision introduced the
> problem:
>
> dt136804@khepri32~/derby/docs-10.4$ svn log -r 641931
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> r641931 | chaase3 | 2008-03-27 19:15:04 +0100 (Thu, 27 Mar 2008) | 4 lines
>
> DERBY-3169: Add documentation for replication
>
> New files for Admin Guide, Reference Manual, Tuning Derby; modified Derby properties table in Tuning Guide.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Do I need a new DITA version or something to build after this?
>
> The error message I get is:
>
> BUILD FAILED
> /export/home/tmp/derby/docs-10.4/build.xml:196: The following error occurred while executing this line:
> /export/home/tmp/derby/docs-10.4/build.xml:215: The following error occurred while executing this line:
> /export/home/tmp/derby/docs-10.4/DITA-OT1.1.2.1/conductor.xml:209: The following error occurred while executing this line:
> /export/home/tmp/derby/docs-10.4/DITA-OT1.1.2.1/ditatargets.xml:78: javax.xml.transform.TransformerException: org.apache.fop.fo.ValidationException: file:///export/home/tmp/derby/docs-10.4/out/ref/refderby.fo:6749:258: Error(6749/258): fo:basic-link, Missing attribute:  Either external-destination or internal-destination must be specified.
>
> Total time: 8 minutes 40 seconds
>

[Dyre Tjeldvoll]

Rick Hillegas <Richard.Hillegas@...> writes:

> I have downloaded the source distribution of the 10.4 beta and have a
> couple comments. After unpacking this distribution, I was able to
> build the docs and I was able to generate a release. The links from
> index.html worked. So the structure of the beta looks good to me. The
> release notes looked sketchy, but I've already sent mail about
> that. In addition, the following looked odd:
>
> o In the user guides, should "Copyright 2004-2007" be changed to
> "Copyright 2004-2008"?

I can fix this.

>
> o The version number in the user documentation is 10.3, not 10.4

So I changed the *conrefs.dita files, but the version number in the pdfs
still says 10.3 (I don't know where to find the version number in the
html docs). What gives?

> o In the JDBC3 public api, there's a spurious line just before the
> title of the top-left frame. The line reads: 'Apache Derby 10.4 API
> Documentation">'

I wonder if this is somehow related to the <Doctitle> or
<Windowtitle> tag, for the javadoc target?

    <javadoc sourcepath="${out.javadoc.dir}/sourcedir"
             executable="${javadocTool}"
             classpath="${compile.classpath};${osgi};${servlet24};${out.dir}"
             breakiterator="true"
             destdir="${public.api.dir}"
             Overview="${basedir}/published_api_overview.html"
             Windowtitle="Apache Derby ${major}.${minor} API Documentation"  
             Header="Apache Derby ${major}.${minor}"
             Footer="${javadoc.Footer}"
             bottom="Apache Derby ${major}.${minor} API Documentation  -  <i&
gt;Copyright &copy; 2004,2008 The Apache Software Foundation. All Rights Res
erved.</i>">  
      <Doctitle><![CDATA[<img src="resources/derby_logo64.png" align="center"> A
pache Derby ${major}.${minor} API Documentation]]></Doctitle>  
      <fileset dir="${derby.engine.src.dir}"

Any javadoc experts out there that would like to comment?

>
> o The NOTICE file says "Copyright 2004-2007". Should that be changed
> to "Copyright 2004-2008"?

Fixed by
dt136804@khepri32~/derby/derby-scratch$ svn log -r 637190
------------------------------------------------------------------------
r637190 | djd | 2008-03-14 19:09:16 +0100 (Fri, 14 Mar 2008) | 1 line

Update the ASF collected works copyright to be 2004-2008 in NOTICE and for the javadoc
------------------------------------------------------------------------

(merged to 10.4)

--
dt

[Dyre Tjeldvoll]

Dyre.Tjeldvoll@... writes:

> Rick Hillegas <Richard.Hillegas@...> writes:
>
>> I have downloaded the source distribution of the 10.4 beta and have a
>> couple comments. After unpacking this distribution, I was able to
>> build the docs and I was able to generate a release. The links from
>> index.html worked. So the structure of the beta looks good to me. The
>> release notes looked sketchy, but I've already sent mail about
>> that. In addition, the following looked odd:
>>
>> o In the user guides, should "Copyright 2004-2007" be changed to
>> "Copyright 2004-2008"?
>
> I can fix this.

Done:

dt136804@khepri32~/derby/docs$ svn commit --file commit-message.txt
Sending        src/adminguide/radmincopyright.dita
Sending        src/conrefs.dita
Sending        src/devguide/rdevcopyright.dita
Sending        src/getstart/rgscopyright.dita
Sending        src/ja_JP/conrefs.dita
Sending        src/ja_JP/ref/rrefcopyright.dita
Sending        src/ref/rrefcopyright.dita
Sending        src/tools/rtoolscopyright.dita
Sending        src/tuning/rtuncopyright.dita
Transmitting file data .........
Committed revision 643881.
dt136804@khepri32~/derby/docs$ svn log -r 643881
------------------------------------------------------------------------
r643881 | dyre | 2008-04-02 14:42:43 +0200 (Wed, 02 Apr 2008) | 3 lines

10.4 release preparations: Bump the version number to 10.4 in *conrefs.dita
and add the year 2008 to Apache copyrights notices.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

(But version number on the front page of the pdfs is still wrong...)

Will merge to 10.4.

--
dt

[Kim Haase]

Dyre.Tjeldvoll@... wrote:

> Rick Hillegas <Richard.Hillegas@...> writes:
>
>> I have downloaded the source distribution of the 10.4 beta and have a
>> couple comments. After unpacking this distribution, I was able to
>> build the docs and I was able to generate a release. The links from
>> index.html worked. So the structure of the beta looks good to me. The
>> release notes looked sketchy, but I've already sent mail about
>> that. In addition, the following looked odd:
>>
>> o In the user guides, should "Copyright 2004-2007" be changed to
>> "Copyright 2004-2008"?
>
> I can fix this.
>
>> o The version number in the user documentation is 10.3, not 10.4
>
> So I changed the *conrefs.dita files, but the version number in the pdfs
> still says 10.3 (I don't know where to find the version number in the
> html docs). What gives?

Took me quite a while to figure this out, but there's a version number
in each ditamap file:

<vrmlist><vrm version="10.3"/></vrmlist>

This is what seems to be used for the PDFs.

Kim

>
>> o In the JDBC3 public api, there's a spurious line just before the
>> title of the top-left frame. The line reads: 'Apache Derby 10.4 API
>> Documentation">'
>
> I wonder if this is somehow related to the <Doctitle> or
> <Windowtitle> tag, for the javadoc target?
>
>     <javadoc sourcepath="${out.javadoc.dir}/sourcedir"
>              executable="${javadocTool}"
>              classpath="${compile.classpath};${osgi};${servlet24};${out.dir}"
>              breakiterator="true"
>              destdir="${public.api.dir}"
>              Overview="${basedir}/published_api_overview.html"
>              Windowtitle="Apache Derby ${major}.${minor} API Documentation"  
>              Header="Apache Derby ${major}.${minor}"
>              Footer="${javadoc.Footer}"
>              bottom="Apache Derby ${major}.${minor} API Documentation  -  <i&
> gt;Copyright &copy; 2004,2008 The Apache Software Foundation. All Rights Res
> erved.</i>">  
>       <Doctitle><![CDATA[<img src="resources/derby_logo64.png" align="center"> A
> pache Derby ${major}.${minor} API Documentation]]></Doctitle>  
>       <fileset dir="${derby.engine.src.dir}"
>
> Any javadoc experts out there that would like to comment?
>
>> o The NOTICE file says "Copyright 2004-2007". Should that be changed
>> to "Copyright 2004-2008"?
>
> Fixed by
> dt136804@khepri32~/derby/derby-scratch$ svn log -r 637190
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> r637190 | djd | 2008-03-14 19:09:16 +0100 (Fri, 14 Mar 2008) | 1 line
>
> Update the ASF collected works copyright to be 2004-2008 in NOTICE and for the javadoc
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> (merged to 10.4)
>

[Dyre Tjeldvoll]

Kim Haase <Camilla.Haase@...> writes:

> Took me quite a while to figure this out, but there's a version number
> in each ditamap file:
>
> <vrmlist><vrm version="10.3"/></vrmlist>
>
> This is what seems to be used for the PDFs.

Thanks a bunch, Kim! :)

--
dt

[Dyre Tjeldvoll]

Kim Haase <Camilla.Haase@...> writes:

> Took me quite a while to figure this out, but there's a version number
> in each ditamap file:
>
> <vrmlist><vrm version="10.3"/></vrmlist>
>
> This is what seems to be used for the PDFs.

Committed revision 643961. (trunk)

--
dt

[Rick Hillegas-2]

Dyre.Tjeldvoll@... wrote:

> Rick Hillegas <Richard.Hillegas@...> writes:
>
>  
>> I have downloaded the source distribution of the 10.4 beta and have a
>> couple comments. After unpacking this distribution, I was able to
>> build the docs and I was able to generate a release. The links from
>> index.html worked. So the structure of the beta looks good to me. The
>> release notes looked sketchy, but I've already sent mail about
>> that. In addition, the following looked odd:
>>
>> o In the user guides, should "Copyright 2004-2007" be changed to
>> "Copyright 2004-2008"?
>>    
>
> I can fix this.
>
>  
>> o The version number in the user documentation is 10.3, not 10.4
>>    
>
> So I changed the *conrefs.dita files, but the version number in the pdfs
> still says 10.3 (I don't know where to find the version number in the
> html docs). What gives?
>
>  
>> o In the JDBC3 public api, there's a spurious line just before the
>> title of the top-left frame. The line reads: 'Apache Derby 10.4 API
>> Documentation">'
>>    
>
> I wonder if this is somehow related to the <Doctitle> or
> <Windowtitle> tag, for the javadoc target?
>
>     <javadoc sourcepath="${out.javadoc.dir}/sourcedir"
>              executable="${javadocTool}"
>              classpath="${compile.classpath};${osgi};${servlet24};${out.dir}"
>              breakiterator="true"
>              destdir="${public.api.dir}"
>              Overview="${basedir}/published_api_overview.html"
>              Windowtitle="Apache Derby ${major}.${minor} API Documentation"  
>              Header="Apache Derby ${major}.${minor}"
>              Footer="${javadoc.Footer}"
>              bottom="Apache Derby ${major}.${minor} API Documentation  -  <i&
> gt;Copyright &copy; 2004,2008 The Apache Software Foundation. All Rights Res
> erved.</i>">  
>       <Doctitle><![CDATA[<img src="resources/derby_logo64.png" align="center"> A
> pache Derby ${major}.${minor} API Documentation]]></Doctitle>  
>       <fileset dir="${derby.engine.src.dir}"
>
> Any javadoc experts out there that would like to comment?
>  

Well, I'm not going to present myself as a javadoc expert but here's my
layman's theory: The exact same javadoc directive is used to build the
jdbc3 and jdbc4 public apis. The spurious line turns up in the jdbc3
javadoc but not the jdbc4 javadoc. The jdbc3 javadoc is built with the
Java 5 javadoc tool and the jdbc4 javadoc is built with the Java 6
javadoc tool. I think that the Java 5 javadoc tool may have a bug that
was corrected in Java 6.

What we're trying to do in this <doctitle> element is a bit tricky. We
are trying to generate javadoc whose overview page has a title
consisting of the Derby logo followed by some useful text. The
<doctitle> element does not allow nested image elements, and we appear
to have hacked around this by stuffing the image and text into a CDATA
section. That CDATA section survives the Java 6 javadoc tool but is
munged by the Java 5 javadoc tool.

I can get rid of the spurious line at the cost of removing the Derby
logo. That is, I get rid of the CDATA section and just put text inside
the <doctitle> element like so:

<Doctitle> Apache Derby ${major}.${minor} API Documentation</Doctitle>  

I miss the pretty logo, but I think that the output without the logo
looks better than the output with both the logo and the spurious line. I
can commit this change unless someone wants to put some more time into
this problem in order to preserve the logo.

Regards,
-Rick

>  
>> o The NOTICE file says "Copyright 2004-2007". Should that be changed
>> to "Copyright 2004-2008"?
>>    
>
> Fixed by
> dt136804@khepri32~/derby/derby-scratch$ svn log -r 637190
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> r637190 | djd | 2008-03-14 19:09:16 +0100 (Fri, 14 Mar 2008) | 1 line
>
> Update the ASF collected works copyright to be 2004-2008 in NOTICE and for the javadoc
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> (merged to 10.4)
>
>