On Dec 17, 2007 12:02 PM, Stefan Bodewig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "Xavier Hanin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > - we are not in sync with what the apache documentation says on how to > > manage web sites [1]. We should put generated site in svn to comply > > Not a hard rule, but still preferred (so the site can be put back into > its old state incase of an accident). It is also better from an > oversight point of view, any site change results in a commit mail.
Any site change should already result in a commit e-mail in the site source. The difference is that we sometimes update the site source without actually updating the site immediately (like I did to prepare beta release). In this case the commits would be more accurate. > > > - by uploading the generated web site, we do not support the executable > flag > > which is a problem for download.cgi > > Like Jan said, use an explicity <sshexec/> - or don't use Ant tasks at > all but use rsync instead. Indeed, but the problem of using rsync is that all current Ivy committers are mostly Windows users AFAIK, so it requires a tool like cygwin installed. > > > > - uploading the whole site takes a long time sometimes for small changes > > only, > > rsync would solve that. > > Still ... > > > Hence I'm in favor of storing the result of site generation in svn and > > checkout this result on people.a.o for the web site. > > +1 Agreed, despite the other possible solutions I'm still +1 too. Other opinions? Xavier > > > Stefan > -- > http://stefan.samaflost.de/ > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- Xavier Hanin - Independent Java Consultant http://xhab.blogspot.com/ http://ant.apache.org/ivy/ http://www.xoocode.org/
