incubator-odf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dave Fisher <dave2w...@comcast.net>
Subject Re: [Proposal] Getting source code and website checked in
Date Wed, 17 Aug 2011 23:28:51 GMT

On Aug 17, 2011, at 1:34 PM, Rob Weir wrote:

> There is a page that gives basic guidelines for Podling Websites [1],
> including some recommended links.  It also refers us to the branding
> guidelines [2].
> 
> Looking at the POI website [3] I see that it has a section in the
> navigator for "Component APIs".  That might be a good model for us to
> follow.  Overtime we might combine our pieces more tightly, but I
> think that for now we are starting with distinct pieces:
> 
> 1) ODFDOM
> 2) Simple API
> 3) ODF Conformance checker
> 4) ODF XSLTRunner and servlet
> 
> I thought initially we could copy the POI website directly, as a basis
> for ours, but it does not appear to use the Apache CMS and markdown.
> Is that correct?

That is correct. It uses an old version of Forrest. You have to build the site separately
and then stage it into production from your people account.

We should copy the Apache CMS setup from AOOo. With that current framework we can wrap both
markdown and html.

> 
> If so, then I'd propose that we "svn copy" the markdown from the
> Apache OpenOffice.org podling's website [4],  and rebrand it for our
> ODF Toolkit website.  That will give us the basic boilerplate for the
> podling website.
> 
> Proposed directory structure:
> 
> For the source code:
> 
> asf/incubator/odf/trunk
> asf/incubator/odf/branches
> asf/incubator/odf/tags
> 
> I don't think we should go immediately to a common tree for the Java
> source.  But maybe have something like this initially:
> 
> asf/incubator/odf/trunk/odfdom/
> asf/incubator/odf/trunk/simple/
> 
> and so on.  We can always move things around once we have it in SVN.
> Of course, I'm open to other ideas on this as well.  But the sooner we
> get the code into SVN, the sooner we can engage and grow a broader,
> more diverse community around this code.
> 
> And then for the website we would start with:
> 
> asf/incubator/odf/site/trunk
> asf/incubator/odf/site/branches
> asf/incubator/odf/site/tags
> 
> We probably don't need a deep directory structure there.  But we could
> have a subdir for each component, e.g.:
> 
> asf/incubator/odf/site/trunk/odfdom
> asf/incubator/odf/site/trunk/simple

OK, if we go with the Apache CMS then there is an implied structure under asf/incubator/odf/site/trunk

asf/incubator/odf/site/trunk/content/odftoolkit/
asf/incubator/odf/site/trunk/lib
asf/incubator/odf/site/trunk/templates

So,

asf/incubator/odf/site/trunk/content/odftoolkit/odfdom
asf/incubator/odf/site/trunk/content/odftoolkit/simple

> 
> etc.
> 
> Any thoughts on this?  Any alternative proposals?
> 
> Since people are still signing up on the list, and we're just getting
> started, I'd like to give a good amount of time for comments.  But if
> there are no objections by Monday at 1200 UTC, then I'll assume Lazy
> Consensus" [5] and request Apache CMS support from Apache
> Infrastructure and start checking in the website framework.

Once we are enabled for svn I can adapt and check in the CMS framework from AOOo. Then whenever
we get the ability to stage and go to production we'll be ready.

Regards,
Dave

> 
> A question:  Is there anything we need to do to enable SVN?  I don't
> see anything at http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/odf/ right
> now.  I assume someone with karma for
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/ needs to bootstrap us?
> 
> -Rob
> 
> 
> 
> [1] http://incubator.apache.org/guides/sites.html
> [2] http://incubator.apache.org/guides/branding.html
> [3] http://poi.apache.org/
> [4] http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/
> [5] http://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html#LazyConsensus


Mime
View raw message