incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Kay Schenk <kay.sch...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: suggested CMS workflows for ooo-site
Date Wed, 04 Jan 2012 17:43:03 GMT
On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 8:46 AM, Dave Fisher <dave2wave@comcast.net> wrote:

>
> On Jan 4, 2012, at 8:28 AM, Joe Schaefer wrote:
>
> > Given that the size of ooo-site is around 9GB, there
> > are some unique challenges here in dealing with the CMS.
> > For the most part tho, the typical workflow of editing
> > a few pages on the site, committing them, and publishing
> > them can all be done reasonably effectively using the CMS
> > website.
> >
> > OTOH, people who need to monkey with templates/** or lib/**
> > files will trigger full site builds and their changes may
> > materially impact every file on the site.  While I've now
> > reduced the build time to around 4 minutes, the bottleneck
> > now remains squarely in the time it takes svn to commit back
> > those changes and to deal with merging those changes during
> > publication requests.
>
> Thanks for your improvements.
>
> >
> > In those circumstances I strongly advise you to use the
> > publish.pl script on people.apache.org to review and if
> > ok publish your changes.  This will eliminate the chances
> > that your browser times out a direct publish request to the
> > CMS site, which is a real hassle given that it takes ~15
> > minutes for a largeish publish request to be processed.
>
> I always use publish.pl when I use my sledgehammer ;-)
>

Well I haven't been using a sledgehammer at all, I think, but routinely use
the following URL for publishing:

 https://cms.apache.org/openofficeorg/publish

you need to login to use it, however. Just a web interface to publish.pl I
think.


> I usually test my changes with local build_site.pl or build_file.pl.
>
> My observation is that the biggest bottleneck is more in the creation of
> the email reports. Particularly after publish.pl returns.
>
> >
> > In the near future we will be upgrading svn to 1.7 on the CMS
> > server which will bring in better performance along with
> > full support for deletions via svn, but I don't expect the
> > performance changes to significantly alter the workflow I'm
> > recommending here.
> >
> > And please for the sake of others who want to work on minor
> > changes to the site, don't make a sledgehammer type commit
> > without following up with an eventual publish request, because
> > publish requests are an all-or-nothing type deal.  That means
> > a sledgehammer commit will cause unreasonable delays for people
> > who are trying to publish minor changes to the site, until
> > the person who did the sledgehammer commit follows thru and
> > publishes everything.
>
> I would recommend that larger template and skeleton changes with the whole
> ooo-site are done locally and fully tested before committing to svn..
>

Probably a VERY good idea...but I'm just as happy to have a limited set of
folks (Dave!), dealing with site-wide template changes. Despite the fact
that I've looked over the templates and tried to figure them out,
well...I'm not real confident about making changes to them. :/ Unless, in
your *free* time, you might work up a nice tutorial on them. :)


> Do you have any recommendations for comparing a locally built site with
> current production in order to understand how big a sledgehammer is being
> built?
>
> Regards,
> Dave
>
> >
> >
> > HTH
>
>


-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK

"You will always be lucky if you know how to make friends
 with strange cats."
                                                  -- *Colonial American
proverb*

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