flex-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Christofer Dutz <christofer.d...@c-ware.de>
Subject AW: AW: [DISCUSS] Switch the site repo to GIT?
Date Sun, 02 Oct 2016 15:40:30 GMT
Hi Alex,

Well no software on the world renders Markdown as HTML in the browser. There is always a conversion
involved. The solution with the orphan branch in Github simply triggers their conversion tool
they have built into their system. But which has to be taken as it is and the projects have
no way of influencing.

That approach would work if we want to have our website called "apache-flex.github.org", but
we don't want that, do we?

We currently can't publish to the website from Jenkins as Jenkins currently doesn't have the
ability to push to Git from a job. BuildBot is the only tool that is allowed to do that (Don't
know why, but it simply is that way). When using BuildBot from Apache we can publish to flex.apache.org
using gitpubsub. You still have to implement the document conversion somehow. Some projects
manually create perl scripts for this which they have to create and maintain. Or you simply
use the mechanism that maven comes with out of the box. And the way I configured it, we could
use all of the formats in my last post to publish content.

The double up-side of this would also be, that it integrates perfectly with the site generation
of the other parts.

In general, the steps I proposed are exactly the ones you did, but I split up "1) get a new
Git repo to replace our SVN site repo." into steps 1-4" which could be done by copying the
pom from the flexjs-compiler module to the new repo ant tweaking it a little. The thing is
that your plan is missing the conversion step.


Von: Alex Harui <aharui@adobe.com>
Gesendet: Sonntag, 2. Oktober 2016 16:18:52
An: dev@flex.apache.org
Betreff: Re: AW: [DISCUSS] Switch the site repo to GIT?

Thanks for looking into this.

That sounds like a lot of steps.  In the little reading I did of GH pages,
it appeared that we could create an 'orphan' branch with a specific name
in any of our existing repos and simply pushing files to the branch would
kick off an update of the site.

I would think gitpubsub at the ASF is also that simple, so I don't quite
get why Maven has to be involved.  Seems like we would/could:

1) get a new Git repo to replace our SVN site repo.
2) set it up for gitpubsub as flex.a.o
3) create asf-site branches in all of our other repos
4) modify our site to point to the pages coming out of the other repos.

Seems like that would be less copying of stuff, and co-locates
repo-specific doc with each repo.  But I could have missed something
important in my quick tour of what is out there.

One more question: are other Apache projects using asciidoc?  Are there
any concerns about having doc generated by a GPL tool like Asciidoc?
Jekyll is  MIT.


On 10/2/16, 3:44 AM, "Christofer Dutz" <christofer.dutz@c-ware.de> wrote:

>Ok so I did a little searching:
>It seems that in general if you setup a git repo and define an "asf-site"
>branch in that (of course have Infra register the repo in their system),
>stuff pushed to that branch is automatically published as website.
>I just tested it, the maven site plugin is able to produce html from:
>- APT (don't know that)
>- XDoc (don't know that)
>- Markdown
>- FML (don't know that)
>- Asciidoctor (After adding the plugin)
>So we could write our content in any of these formats.
>I found this very helpful page of a fellow Apache project [1].
>They said, that Markdown had the advantage of allowing inline HTML. So I
>understand that this could be ideal for the parts of the site where we
>need detailed control over the HTML.
>Asciidoctor has the advantage of allowing more features (inline graphs
>and diagrams just to state one thing I really like). So this could be
>ideal for the parts where we need features over control of the HTML.
>So why not simply allow to use both?
>I have done some searching and I'd like to propose something:
>1. We create a new git repo for the site
>2. I setup a maven site project inside that
>3. I configure the build to allow multiple types of content
>        - Markdown (same as github pages)
>        - Asciidoctor
>4. I configure the build to deploy the site to the "asf-site" branch of
>the same repo
>5. We have infra setup the gitpubsub system to stage that somewhere so we
>can test it
>6. We do the Content migration, CSS, HTML fine tuning till we're happy
>with it
>7. We make the new site the official site.
>Would that be an option?
>[1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/TRAFODION/Modify+Web+Site
>Von: Alex Harui <aharui@adobe.com>
>Gesendet: Sonntag, 2. Oktober 2016 07:14:42
>An: dev@flex.apache.org
>Betreff: Re: [DISCUSS] Switch the site repo to GIT?
>It is time to consider getting off of Apache CMS.  I think some projects
>have done so already.  I'd like to know more about what we lose/gain if we
>go way from Apache CMS.
>Some projects are experimenting with GitHub Pages.  I think it should be
>considered as well.
>On 10/1/16, 9:11 AM, "carlos.rovira@gmail.com on behalf of Carlos Rovira"
><carlos.rovira@gmail.com on behalf of carlos.rovira@codeoscopic.com>
>>Orher projects using git for the cms what are using?
>>Could we switch, for example, to a wordpress cms if we want?
>>El sábado, 1 de octubre de 2016, Christofer Dutz
>>> Ok so it turns out that as long as we use the Apache CMS we can't
>>> to GIT. Guess this was the reason for still being on GIT.
>>> I have no idea what we really need the CMS for, but as long as we need
>>> this, we seem to be stuck there :-(
>>> Chris
>>> ________________________________
>>> Von: Alex Harui <aharui@adobe.com <javascript:;>>
>>> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 29. September 2016 18:56:39
>>> An: dev@flex.apache.org <javascript:;>
>>> Betreff: Re: [DISCUSS] Switch the site repo to GIT?
>>> On 9/29/16, 1:43 AM, "Christofer Dutz" <christofer.dutz@c-ware.de
>>> <javascript:;>> wrote:
>>> >Hi guys,
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >as you might know I have been working hard on the site-generation and
>>> >this finally seems to be working nicely. The only problem I have is
>>> >I can't submit to the site repo from the Build agent as SVN isn't
>>> >to allow that. Git however is able to commit without hard-coding
>>> >credentials. Infra suggested to move our site to GIT to resolve this
>>> >issue.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >I was wondering anyway why this is our only SVN repo. Wouldn't it be
>>> >to have everything in one type of repo?
>>> The fact our web site is on SVN isn't a big deal to me, but what is a
>>> deal is 99% of the time I find the two-step staging/publish workflow
>>> really painful.  Related, there is currently no way for the MD5 checker
>>> the CI server to update the website automatically.  If moving to Git
>>> us out of that, I'd be for it.  Can you provide more info on how folks
>>> staging when working on big overhauls and why Git doesn't have this
>>> credential issue?
>>> Thanks,
>>> -Alex
>>Carlos Rovira
>>Director General
>>M: +34 607 22 60 05
>>Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario y puede contener
>>información privilegiada o confidencial. Si ha recibido este mensaje por
>>error, le rogamos que nos lo comunique inmediatamente por esta misma vía
>>proceda a su destrucción.
>>De la vigente Ley Orgánica de Protección de Datos (15/1999), le
>>que sus datos forman parte de un fichero cuyo responsable es CODEOSCOPIC
>>S.A. La finalidad de dicho tratamiento es facilitar la prestación del
>>servicio o información solicitados, teniendo usted derecho de acceso,
>>rectificación, cancelación y oposición de sus datos dirigiéndose a
>>oficinas c/ Paseo de la Habana 9-11, 28036, Madrid con la documentación

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message