httpd-docs mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joe Schaefer <>
Subject Re: Proposal to move docs to Apache CMS
Date Mon, 30 Apr 2012 17:02:27 GMT
Oh right, there are some superficial changes to make as well,
like ensuring there's a "trunk/" dir that contains everything
and that the sources are all within trunk/content".

----- Original Message -----
> From: Joe Schaefer <>
> To: "" <>
> Cc: 
> Sent: Monday, April 30, 2012 12:46 PM
> Subject: Re: Proposal to move docs to Apache CMS
> ----- Original Message -----
>>  From: Daniel Gruno <>
>>  To:
>>  Cc: 
>>  Sent: Monday, April 30, 2012 11:36 AM
>>  Subject: Proposal to move docs to Apache CMS
>>  Hi all,
>>  Joe Schaefer has proposed that we move our documentation to the Apache
>>  CMS(?) system (or at least try it out with a copy of trunk). From what I
>>  have gathered with my discussion with Joe, this move would allow for
>>  certain different ways of managing our documentation:
>>  1) We can continue to commit XML files to SVN as we do now, but the
>>  rebuilding could be managed by the CMS system, so we wouldn't have to
>>  rebuild everything ourselves and then commit a heap of files for every
>>  small edit we do. I am not aware of what would happen if someone commits
>>  invalid XML though, but Joe should be on this mailing list, so if you
>>  could, please do tell how that would be handled.
> The CMS relies on the build system to report errors thru its exit status.
> So if invalid XML is properly reported by the existing build system, the
> build will fail and the follow-on buildbot staging commit won't happen.
> The bug will need to be corrected before any further changes can be published.
>>  2) We can update/edit the XML files through an online XML editor
>>  (presumably through cms.a.o?), and the resulting changes in the XHTML
>>  will be automatically rebuilt by the server. This could ease up
>>  situations where you have to make a minor modification, but don't have
>>  all your SVN tools and repos at hand.
>>  This would, no doubt, be a big change in the way we work, and it would
>>  also require that we convert our existing documents to utf-8 format, but
>>  I do see some clear advantages in this proposal, thus I'm sending it to
>>  this list.
>>  Any thoughts, ideas, comments?
> I've looked over the docs trees to see what needs to happen before this
> could actually work in practice.  Besides migrating the sources to utf-8,
> there are a few other items that will need to be dealt with:
> 1) the build system will need to take a run-time argument to change the
> location of the build results to an arbitrary directory.  IOW the build
> artifacts will go to a different (configurable) directory than the sources.
> The CMS will commit the build results back to svn, and the publication process
> is based on things being in svn, so you will be able to checkout/tag/whatever
> the live tree for release purposes.
> 2) the source documents themselves will need to be renamed from foo.xml.$lang to
> foo.$lang.xml and the build will need to preserve this rename- it is important
> to the CMS that the .xml/.html extension is in the final position.
> 3) the CMS will need some tweaking to get the redirect code to DTRT for
> the docs trees.
> Otherwise that should cover the required changes.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

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

View raw message