cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Steven Noels <stev...@outerthought.org>
Subject Re: Daisy as a docs editor (was Re: [CocoonInAction] Opening announce)
Date Wed, 20 Apr 2005 08:11:35 GMT
On 20 Apr 2005, at 00:20, Ross Gardler wrote:

>>> ok, you mean replacing the SVN repository and only use Daisy?
>> The content for our site needs to be in SVN. That's how the ASF and 
>> board maintain their oversight, they know where to look for IP 
>> 'owned' by Apache. If we start storing it elsewhere, we remove the 
>> ability for Apache members to know where ASF content is.
>
> OK

I don't know of any "regulation" in this perspective, other than that 
PMCs are required to provide oversight for the projects they're 
managing, and that ideally, this should be done using "familiar" tools 
like mailing lists & SVN.

Given the abundance of tools for managing website content, I think the 
only remaining common denominator is: the de-facto standard "site 
publishing protocol" is committing a bunch of HTML files into an SVN 
repo.

There's a difference between storing site content in SVN, and how you 
manage site sources. I'm not advocating one scenario or another, but as 
long as the sources are properly oversighted due to mailing lists 
notifications, I reckon the requiredness of SVN is only because that's 
the common denominator in case of calamities: when site sources are 
stored in SVN, people can easily resurrect a site in case servers are 
swapped around. If the SVN repo isn't wedged, of course. ;)

</Steven>
-- 
Steven Noels                            http://outerthought.org/
Outerthought - Open Source Java & XML            An Orixo Member
Read my weblog at            http://blogs.cocoondev.org/stevenn/
stevenn at outerthought.org                stevenn at apache.org


Mime
View raw message