Mailing-List: contact dev-help@hbase.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@hbase.apache.org
From: Andrew Purtell <andrew.purtell@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Moving the HBase site to use a stand-alone git repo
Message-Id: <AE935266-D614-4993-B0FC-95C5901E6271@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2015 09:00:35 -0800
References: 
 <CAGHyZ6+5aXUgdcPwirHivetHt_mvDbN8fzo-LAgzidZp8ddy9A@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAGHyZ6+5aXUgdcPwirHivetHt_mvDbN8fzo-LAgzidZp8ddy9A@mail.gmail.com>
To: dev@hbase.apache.org

No concerns here. 

> On Dec 2, 2015, at 8:56 AM, Sean Busbey <busbey@cloudera.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Folks!
> 
> You may recall the occasional emails dev@ gets from a Jenkins job Misty set
> up to make updating the website easier for us. They're titled "HBase
> Generate Website" and they give a series of steps any committer can run to
> push the changes live.
> 
> Misty has been investigating automating this entirely[1], so that once
> updates land in the master source branch the website just updates. IMO,
> this would go a long way to improving how consistently updates make it to
> our primary public-facing presence.
> 
> During our conversation with INFRA (on the jira[1] and in a infra@apache
> thread), the consensus seems to be that having an automated non-human
> process push to a repo that doesn't contain source that might lead to a
> release is acceptable. In contrast, such non-human pushing to our main repo
> (even if just to the asf-site branch) is seen as higher risk that would
> require a policy decision.
> 
> Is everyone (especially PMCs) fine with us moving our site to a different
> repository?
> 
> Presumably something like hbase-site. The expectation is that in almost all
> cases folks won't need to checkout or track this remote since the automated
> job will be pushing rendered updates for us.
> 
> 
> [1]: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-10722
> 
> -- 
> Sean