httpd-docs mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From André Malo>
Subject Re: Proposal to move docs to Apache CMS
Date Tue, 01 May 2012 17:12:36 GMT
I don't know much about the CMS->SVN system. We use the revision numbers 
heavily to track translation age. Does this continue to work?


* Joe Schaefer wrote:

> ----- 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:

Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook.
Ook! Ook? Ook. Ook? Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook.
Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook? Ook. Ook! Ook! Ook? Ook! Ook. Ook? Ook. Ook.
Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook! Ook. Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook!           Ook! Ook.

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

View raw message