incubator-easyant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Antoine Levy Lambert <anto...@gmx.de>
Subject Re: The website
Date Fri, 18 Feb 2011 15:45:12 GMT


On 2/17/11 2:52 PM, Jean-Louis Boudart wrote:
> I was also in favor of using Xooki as we already use it for documentation.
> We already have a xooki plugin for easyant that can handle history a la ivy.
+1
> By the way i don't know enough Apache infrastructure to know how we could
> deal for publication and how to enhance the publication workflow. Reading
> your description here seems to highlight that Apache CMS would be easier to
> maintain / use.
>
As Nicolas says he can contact Infrastructure and ask them whether a 
more integrated workflow around xooki is possible. I will support that. 
I think infrastructure should support several source formats for web 
sites and not make it a constraint to use a particular form of markup as 
source code.
> Le 17 février 2011 18:49, Nicolas Lalevée<nicolas.lalevee@hibnet.org>  a
> écrit :
>
>> As one of the first steps, I think we should setup a web site.
>>
>> Then comes the question about the tool to use.
>>
>> I am in favor of using xooki, since the current documentation is also based
>> on it. We could also imagine using the Apache CMS for the site, and xooki
>> for the doc.
>>
>> The pros for the Apache CMS is that it is well supported by the infra team.
>> It has a build-in notion of staging website: get some preview before going
>> live; here is the example of the main asf staging site :
>> http://www.staging.apache.org/. Something nice too is that we only need to
>> edit the templates, the building and committing of the actual html files are
>> delegated to a buildbot. Last but not least, once build, the doc get onto
>> the staging or the production websites in few seconds.
>> Interesting links about the CMS:
>> https://blogs.apache.org/infra/entry/the_asf_cms
>>
>> http://journal.paul.querna.org/articles/2010/10/22/evolution-of-apaches-websites/
>> http://www.apache.org/dev/cms.html
>> http://www.apache.org/dev/cmsref.html
>>
>> The pros for xooki is that is can manage the tree of content of the
>> site/documentation (see the tree on the left on the Ivy site:
>> http://ant.apache.org/ivy/). I think this is a important feature. Then
>> about build and deployment, lots of manual steps. You'll have to build
>> things locally, and commit them yourself. Then go to people.apache.org and
>> do a svn up there. And wait few hours to finally get it online.
>> We use that process for both Ivy and IvyDE website. I'm trying to find a
>> way to improve this, working a have a quite similar process to the Apache
>> CMS one. This change is also needed because the infra team is willing to
>> depreciate people.apache.org for website publishing in favor of the Apache
>> CMS. But I didn't find a way yet to use xooki within the CMS workflow.
+1
>> I'm in favor in choosing xooki, betting that I'll find a way to deal with a
>> better workflow.
>> But if I fail the site will have to be migrated to the CMS, which might be
>> some piece of work.
>>
>> WDYT ?
>>
>> Nicolas
>>
>>
>


Mime
View raw message