logging-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com>
Subject Re: Mandatory svnpubsub migration by Jan 2013
Date Sat, 11 Feb 2012 01:02:21 GMT

On Feb 9, 2012, at 11:22 AM, Brett Porter wrote:

> 
> On 10/02/2012, at 12:36 AM, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
> 
>> Hello Infra!
>> 
>> At the logging project most sub projects commit generated html to svn.
>> Going live is a matter of "svn up". Guess there is no problem to use
>> svnpubsub.
>> 
>> But there is one component (the upcoming log4j 2.0) which has started
>> with mvn site deploy. Is there a recommendation how combine this with
>> svnpubsub? The idea was to deploy to a local folder which is then
>> committed to svn. This would probably mean that a log4j2.0 website
>> update does mean a huge commit because most sources might be touched.
>> Is it a problem?
> 
> We've been discussing how to best handle that on the Maven developer's list: http://s.apache.org/maven-site-svn

Thanks Brett, I saw that thread as it occurred. However, it seems there isn't really any good
resolution.  It takes me no more than 5 minutes to deploy the site to my user account at p.a.o.
 Log4j 2 is about 30MB so if Simone's experience correlates I should expect this will become
roughly 1 hr and 15 minutes.  That won't be tolerable.

Ralph


Mime
View raw message