incubator-easyant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jean-Louis Boudart <>
Subject Re: The website
Date Thu, 17 Feb 2011 19:52:35 GMT
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.

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.

Le 17 février 2011 18:49, Nicolas Lalevée <> 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 :
> 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:
> 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:
> 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 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 for website publishing in favor of the Apache
> CMS. But I didn't find a way yet to use xooki within the CMS workflow.
> 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

Jean Louis Boudart
Independent consultant
Project Lead

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message