Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-geronimo-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 83408 invoked from network); 2 May 2007 21:50:12 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 2 May 2007 21:50:12 -0000 Received: (qmail 73925 invoked by uid 500); 2 May 2007 21:50:16 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-geronimo-dev-archive@geronimo.apache.org Received: (qmail 73864 invoked by uid 500); 2 May 2007 21:50:16 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@geronimo.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: List-Post: Reply-To: dev@geronimo.apache.org List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list dev@geronimo.apache.org Received: (qmail 73853 invoked by uid 99); 2 May 2007 21:50:16 -0000 Received: from herse.apache.org (HELO herse.apache.org) (140.211.11.133) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 02 May 2007 14:50:16 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: domain of jason.dillon@gmail.com designates 66.249.82.228 as permitted sender) Received: from [66.249.82.228] (HELO wx-out-0506.google.com) (66.249.82.228) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 02 May 2007 14:50:08 -0700 Received: by wx-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id s18so273284wxc for ; Wed, 02 May 2007 14:49:48 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:content-type:message-id:content-transfer-encoding:from:subject:date:to:x-mailer:sender; b=OCACAse/jWLr4nU8F4tMIUC7NaBuSBBzoejYDUIJH097cULV/cPNwN2qHNH+wiiWc5jzrDorZEJaJCxGv6m+6l7CBaX2Qk5vGPkEJeTdsN/sTECKgwpz5I/biolsQiWRao05bmMd0XtlxD1Muk+pp3TqgsiQFIBCHUDlpBZD2rg= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:content-type:message-id:content-transfer-encoding:from:subject:date:to:x-mailer:sender; b=kyax3/2iTxZCRo0/je8m7TrFnvLJtz/jwnorXb1HzxlZkcvSBGymclActF45l7KUkVuCk7F9Tz61//vUq/bdSRzPbsIjlO514mfEuCpIZELvJk3XMjbHWk+Y0WgpX7EdysxjPjLazdCW9OHEm84nYOgXyP8pIgT6bsvbX8gEprk= Received: by 10.70.92.12 with SMTP id p12mr2189629wxb.1178142587910; Wed, 02 May 2007 14:49:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?10.0.1.100? ( [24.7.69.241]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id h10sm1886545wxd.2007.05.02.14.49.46; Wed, 02 May 2007 14:49:47 -0700 (PDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.3) In-Reply-To: References: <46373964.3090609@gmail.com> <53A03568-C7B9-4EB1-9983-93ACAB30D1EA@planet57.com> <1D295B5D-1C04-4775-A3EB-33A607CCE31A@gmail.com> <4637A8BA.3040005@gmail.com> <46388E3A.2090009@gmail.com> <95C5E92C-1451-4180-825C-98763514730E@planet57.com> <463894B4.5010400@gmail.com> <9E0EE2A1-2D0F-4BBD-BCDF-38272FDCC5A3@planet57.com> <463899A1.70202@gmail.com> <992EBA73-3891-4622-B13E-C32F39B0DEB2@planet57.com> <4638A9C2.3010104@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-Id: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Jason Dillon Subject: Re: web site update Date: Wed, 2 May 2007 14:49:45 -0700 To: dev@geronimo.apache.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.752.3) Sender: Jason Dillon X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org I see so you just left one box logo on the downloads page then? Not the direction I would have hopped... and its still got that ugly border... :-( --jason On May 2, 2007, at 2:32 PM, Jason Dillon wrote: > On May 2, 2007, at 8:09 AM, Hernan Cunico wrote: >> 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. > > This is the same box logo which I'm talking about. > > I thought I had explained this already... > > I give up. You do it how you want and if you end up copying the > image over and over I'll try to explain again later why duplicating > is bad. > > --jason > > > >> 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: >>> >>> 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. >>> >>> 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 >