cordova-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dmitry Blotsky <>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS][DOCS] Revert a change
Date Wed, 13 Sep 2017 16:47:33 GMT
Yes, ideally our deployment process should be automated. Also, it should *not* be an SVN commit.
It should be an rsync or an scp command. I would support any initiatives to move to either
one of those. If we had automated deployment, this discussion would be moot.

How much would it cost us to just have a VPS with nginx?

Switching to the topic of deployment docs now. Thanks, Shaz, for bringing this up in discussion.
My opinion was that we shouldn't have impactful commands be copy-paste-able, which is why
I had the instruction to commit in paragraph text. I think that if a committer doesn't read
the full text of the deployment docs, *they should not be deploying*. I can see the argument
that if they do read the text but just don't know *how* to commit in SVN, it's annoying to
search. However at the top of that section is an explicit link to a quick SVN tutorial. I
understand that not everyone reads the fine print, but IMO committers should, and we should
explicitly discourage that behaviour.

Ultimately I'm going to defer to Shaz here, but I think it's important to consider the benefits
of making deployment *feel* more serious by making RTFD necessary.


> On Sep 13, 2017, at 6:30 AM, Jan Piotrowski <> wrote:
> I am actually surprised deploying is a manual process at all.
> Having read the steps, I understand why of course.
> As a person that jumps in on all kinds of projects, I absolutely
> prefer docs that list each and every little step needed (including all
> the `cd` etc).
> The need for manual steps or checks could be emphasized by using a
> numbered list or checklist for the individual steps.
> (Will this stay on SVN even after the repo switch to Github? Merging
> and `gh-pages` is so nice and simple)
> -J
> 2017-09-13 9:02 GMT+02:00 Shazron <>:
>> This relates solely to instructions on how to *build* the site, and not the
>> contents of the site itself.
>> Bringing this up here for discussion since a committer wants to revert a
>> change by another committer, and there is potential for disagreement.
>> The pull request to revert is here:
>> There has been discussion on the original change here:
>> Two issues here:
>> 1. The change from `gulp build --prod` to `npm run serve`
>> 2. This instruction here (not reverted in the PR):
>> Issue (1) has some discussion in the GH link above for the original change.
>> Issue (2) there was some discussion in the Cordova Slack, that the reason
>> the `svn commit` wasn't there in the first place is to prevent copy/paste
>> of the commands without going through the changes step by step since
>> deploying to a site is an expensive operation that can screw up the site if
>> proper care was not done.
>> My reason for adding the command was that the instructions are not complete
>> (when I had to do it myself when updating the docs for cordova-ios
>> release). I understand the rationale, but the instructions seem incomplete
>> (especially for new committers that haven't heard of SVN, I know they can
>> Google it, but that's more friction) and my other reason is: we should
>> trust that committers will do the right thing.
>> Not to make a mountain out of a mole-hill but it's important that these
>> revert discussions be out in the open so as misunderstandings/hurt feelings
>> don't occur, and we can nip it in the bud.
>> Thoughts from the community?
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message