Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 6E41CB1D5 for ; Wed, 4 Jan 2012 17:43:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 9439 invoked by uid 500); 4 Jan 2012 17:43:29 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 9396 invoked by uid 500); 4 Jan 2012 17:43:29 -0000 Mailing-List: contact ooo-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 9388 invoked by uid 99); 4 Jan 2012 17:43:29 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 04 Jan 2012 17:43:29 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.5 required=5.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of kay.schenk@gmail.com designates 209.85.215.175 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.215.175] (HELO mail-ey0-f175.google.com) (209.85.215.175) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 04 Jan 2012 17:43:24 +0000 Received: by eaal1 with SMTP id l1so15703621eaa.6 for ; Wed, 04 Jan 2012 09:43:03 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=11obGmCGp8slVhpjFz6AZKVd0hsd1gpncVVsBZ0fY0s=; b=tWpXzzX1oQlitVtzo/QwgN/4dPbxScYGX7g7/y1sMzlC20f9tPmhIFsHHlFxNlBeCH 4Zo/YPgy60/g5yfVMfXiSbk5BPbhDpwnETE7eSZTl62T2hIA3C1n69ENbNhTMuSspbV+ 8Oq3AbUnk++sy5nWc0fjSrlFgclqqUoIEmetg= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.204.153.15 with SMTP id i15mr13171218bkw.43.1325698983128; Wed, 04 Jan 2012 09:43:03 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.204.58.81 with HTTP; Wed, 4 Jan 2012 09:43:03 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <1325694487.26057.YahooMailNeo@web160903.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2012 09:43:03 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: suggested CMS workflows for ooo-site From: Kay Schenk To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0015175cd5cef7eddd04b5b7588e --0015175cd5cef7eddd04b5b7588e Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 8:46 AM, Dave Fisher 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* --0015175cd5cef7eddd04b5b7588e--