I worry that the nightly build documentation is too prominent. A search for "indexwriter api" on Google or Yahoo! returns nightly documentation before released documentation.
Yes.. just tried that.
... trying to promote the nightly outside the developer community, which is wrong.
I agree. Can this be avoided by robots,txt on hudson?
I believe that Doron's intent is to link to the HTML version of the non-released trunk version of CHANGES.txt from the main web page (please correct me if I'm wrong, Doron)
Well I'm not sure where they should be copied to - just want to make the changes accessible.
Perhaps there's no need to copy the changes folder at all (see below).
Sure, it makes sense to make changes.txt relatively easy to find, like the bug database, so that folks can get an idea of what to expect in upcoming releases. Both should be part of the project's developer documentation, not the product documentation.
CHANGES.txt is already accessible from "Lucene News" in the main site.
I think it makes sense to generate (once) Changes.html for 2.3 and add it to 2.3 branch and modify the main site to link to that file.
Also, I think the 2.3 branch docs should link to this file.
(I was planning to get to discuss this later.)
I was mostly responding to the remarks above about copying the nightly docs to the public website, the motivation for which I don't fully follow.
Only the changes directory is to be copied,
Nightly documentation is copied already today from hudson to l.a.o/java/docs/nightly.
Doug, are you concerned with current practice, or just with additionally copying the changes folder?
if the latter. I think it is possible to link/redirect to Changes.html that is generated by the nightly build on hudson, the same as seems to be done for the javadocs links?