Mailing-List: contact dev-help@archiva.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@archiva.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: local policy)
From: "Eric Barboni" <Eric.Barboni@irit.fr>
To: <dev@archiva.apache.org>
References: 
 <CAPoyBqQqtC=oxSoPjz4U=Ghn9SfnBcrSfX-BEwSiE8F7CTscYQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAPbd=T6x+stdcF7QAFk+fF9oCU8FzWPdkhb2aL8bKPAJSubxyA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAPoyBqQYObb_BPUdJMj4Dk-y=vd6NcHP20F+_+9Vc=7C9qtTSQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAPbd=T6QjuuofZZQZTCqaV8DO2Z2Ri0U-vO=PEpJZuRuBKtd=g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAPoyBqS3pEerVx0Y81oXLBA1zTsG4EnWzpt6iczFToevJd9sBA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAPoyBqR44wPKvhuw9LDV80fbR1ytZKZ4ws+Kicu=RHzdr+OfmQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAPoyBqR44wPKvhuw9LDV80fbR1ytZKZ4ws+Kicu=RHzdr+OfmQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: RE: Moving site to svnpub
Date: Mon, 3 Sep 2012 10:38:47 +0200
Message-ID: <007e01cd89af$892c8210$9b858630$@irit.fr>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Thread-Index: 
 AQF6pmhVOt0Z1O1NUYgT/ilkIWMWigHUqEo6AKaSuJYCXJw8HQJZ4tzXAo0lxVKX0BjCIA==
Content-Language: fr

Hi,

 your mix approach seems lighter for us.
Does the current process means if we update site-content and change and
commit there it may be published with no match from the modules site
sources?

Eric


-----Message d'origine-----
De=A0: Olivier Lamy [mailto:olamy@apache.org]=20
Envoy=E9=A0: lundi 3 septembre 2012 09:09
=C0=A0: dev@archiva.apache.org
Objet=A0: Re: Moving site to svnpub

So that's fast to deploy web sites now.
But the main issue when you want to update main site is to =
checkout/update
the full content locally (including docs subsites redback etc...) : OUCH =
!
I wonder about using a mix solution as we try in maven. The main site =
will
deployed using a kind of cms (a buildbot job do mvn site and then =
publish
the site: we need only to go to cms and click on publish).

WDYT ?

2012/8/29 Olivier Lamy <olamy@apache.org>:
> done.
> Now site deployment is really fast :-)
>
> 2012/8/29 Deng Ching <oching@apache.org>:
>> Cool, thanks Olivier! :)
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 1:14 AM, Olivier Lamy <olamy@apache.org> =
wrote:
>>
>>> 2012/8/28 Deng Ching <oching@apache.org>:
>>> > +1
>>> >
>>> > AFAIK, most of our users are using either 1.3.5 of 1.4-M2 so it=20
>>> > should probably be fine to keep just n & n-1 reference..
>>>
>>> Sure.
>>> So I did the job (sorry for email spamming :-) ).
>>> The svn path is here:
>>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/archiva/site-content/
>>> Most of the content has been imported and pom configured !
>>> I will ask infra to use this for sync live to archiva.a.o
>>>
>>>
>>> >
>>> > Thanks,
>>> > Deng
>>> >
>>> > On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 4:47 AM, Olivier Lamy <olamy@apache.org>
wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> Hi,
>>> >> I'd like we move our site to svnpub (faster prod live around 2/3=20
>>> >> minutes after the commit really faster than the rsync :-) ).
>>> >> I have tested that on an other Apache project
>>> >> (http://directmemory.apache.org) with the maven plugin=20
>>> >> =
(http://maven.apache.org/sandbox/plugins/maven-scm-publish-plugin/).
>>> >>
>>> >> First I have to import some content from p.a.o.
>>> >> Question are we sure about keep all of those versionned=20
>>> >> documentation (http://archiva.apache.org/docs/).
>>> >> Having n and n-1 sounds enough for me.
>>> >>
>>> >> WDYT ?
>>> >>
>>> >> Thanks
>>> >> --
>>> >> Olivier Lamy
>>> >> Talend: http://coders.talend.com
>>> >> http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy
>>> >>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Olivier Lamy
>>> Talend: http://coders.talend.com
>>> http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy
>>>
>
>
>
> --
> Olivier Lamy
> Talend: http://coders.talend.com
> http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy


--
Olivier Lamy
Talend: http://coders.talend.com
http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy