geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Hernan Cunico <hcun...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: web site update
Date Wed, 02 May 2007 15:09:54 GMT
just to be sure, what is the "logo" you are talking about?

I'm talking about the Geronimo boxes as in http://cwiki.apache.org/GMOxSITE/downloads.data/geronimo-box-1.1-small.jpg,
this is a unique image that is to be used only for the 1.1 release in this case. Each image
would be used only once, I can't see why attaching that unique image file to a unique page
is such a bad thing.

If the images are attached to confluence and we export the space, all the content gets exported.
Hence we have a self contained copy of the web site with very limited external dependencies,
that is for the actual downloads.

Even if we serve those images from svn we would still have to copy every single one from site/trunk/art
to site/trunk/docs/images

One additional tiny benefit on the attachment approach is that the image served from confluence
is approx 4 times smaller in size compared to the one we have on svn. I know, I did that to
make the rendering a bit faster but my point is that we will still have to do some additional
steps either way, not only svn cp.

Now, if we want to serve all the static content from all our the cwiki spaces directly from
svn that's a different story.

Cheers!
Hernan

Jason Dillon wrote:
> On May 2, 2007, at 7:01 AM, Hernan Cunico wrote:
>> Jason Dillon wrote:
>>> Um... why?
>>> That mens for each release we have a duplicate image?  That is crazy
>> not really, wasn't your point to have a unique image for each release 
>> page? maybe I didn't understand
> 
> No, I want to have one box image in http://geronimo.apache.org/images/ 
> per version, and have each release page reference it (like a normal web 
> page would do).
> 
> 
>>> man.  Thats like saying that each page has the banner image attached 
>>> to it, though admittedly that is much worse, but its along the same 
>>> lines as what you are suggesting.
>>
>> right, there is no point in copying the very same image over and over 
>> again, so there is clearly a misunderstanding here.
> 
> Um... I'm confused... you said:
> 
> <snip>
> I think we should be consistent in the way we manage the attachments 
> with confluence.
> I rather have them attached to corresponding release page.
> There are not that many to copy over anyway.
> </snip>
> 
> I read this as you want to have the images of the box log attached to 
> the corresponding release page, meaning each page has a separate copy of 
> the same logo.  I'm not sure how I could have read it any differently :-(
> 
> 
>> If we are going to use just one image (independent of the Geronimo 
>> version) on each release page then we definitively point to the same 
>> spot where we have the banners and logos on the repo.
>> However, if we want to have for each release page a new Geronimo box 
>> with a matching version number, then we should to attach each of those 
>> images to the corresponding release page. This is the approach I 
>> thought we were talking about. If we go this way then we need to come 
>> up with a kind of standard way to create that image, today we are 
>> missing 1.0 and 1.1.1.
> 
> Right, I don't think we need to have an image that matches the exact 
> version.  I think that 1.1, 1.1.1, 1.1.2, etc... all use the 1.1 logo, 
> 2.0, 2.0.1, 2.0.2, etc. all use the 2.0 logo, and so on.
> 
> Ask Hiram to whip up a 1.0 version, he said it was relatively easy.
> 
> I don't think we want to have separate images for 2.0-m5, 2.0-m6, 
> 2.0-m99, 2.0.1, etc, basically one image per major branch... else we'd 
> be asking Hiram to make new images all of the time ;-)
> 
> --jason
> 
> 

Mime
View raw message