On 28 November 2012 18:47, Andrea Pescetti <pesce...@apache.org> wrote:
> On 27/11/2012 23:23, janI wrote: > >> On 27 November 2012 22:53, Andrea Pescetti wrote: >> >>> On 25/11/2012 jan iversen wrote: >>> I agree we should have this stuff versioned (actually, all configuration >>> files on the Apache infrastructure are versioned, but in distinct SVN >>> repository). I'll check with Infra what's the best place for versioning >>> configuration files and report back, provided I get an answer. >>> >> As far as I know, that is the only svn I have access to...and we do have >> ooo-site in there, so it would be quite natural to have wiki as well. >> > > Infra (Gavin) says that some files already are under version > control, and that the correct place to put config files is under: > /infrainfrastructure/trunk/**machines/vms/ooo-wiki.apache.**org/<http://ooo-wiki.apache.org/> > [Note: I don't know if he really meant "infrainfrastructure"] > He says that some files under /etc/ are there. > That is the OS files (like apacheconf etc.), I am mostly talking about mwiki php files and e.g. my user_removal script (from /x1), this is a lot more than configuration files. An example is our page layout with banner. > Gavin asks that you catch him (or another infra member) on IRC #asfinfra > to agree on the best way of doing this. he is a very responsive person, helped me quite quickly even though I made a couple of beginner mistakes. I will for now simply postpone the whole issue, Once it is all running I will present the package, and then the community, infra and whoever else can discuss if or where the files are to be stored. Wiki is updated to reflect this procedure. > > > it is nice that all AOO stuff is in >> one SVN, and that is nicely divided into distinct directories. >> > > We can disagree about the "nicely divided", but this is only aesthetic and > not a blocker for this discussion! > > > they do have (of course) SVN for VM specific settings, but wiki php >> files or mysql scripts, that is not part of their domain. >> > > Apparently they prefer to version application-specific files in the same > way, but just find out with them directly as explained above, it's easier. > Which means I can find the original wiki files in their repository, that sounds like a brilliant idea to find out what have changed during the apache period, that will help a lot with the upgrade. I have found /infrastructure in the repos but I cannot find the trunk/machines. > > g) Make a test.wiki.openoffice.org. ... >>> >>> We will also need to have the DNS entry created in that case. Again, a >>> JIRA ticket is needed. And the test installation should be configured to: >>> not send e-mails; have a .htaccess password protection so that nobody >>> opens >>> it by mistake. >>> >> Actually we do have a number of aliases on wiki at the moment that are not >> in the DNS >> > > Yes, but we only alias *.openoffice.org , not *.*.openoffice.org ; so > test.wiki.openoffice.org won't resolve, while testwiki.openoffice.orgwould. > > > We need to have a place to test an upgrade, with mail, create user and >> everything, otherwise we run a high risk when it is moved to production. >> > > Enabling mail is quite a risk. If I am watching a page and you edit it on > test, I will receive a notification. If you bulk-edit 100 pages just to > try, I'll receive 100 notifications! If it really needs to be enabled I > would recommend to make sure it doesn't have side effects for the tests > that are run. ok will be done, wiki is updated. > > > And I dont think anybody uses e.g. "test.wiki.openoffice.org" or " >> solelyfortesting.wiki.**openoffice.org<http://solelyfortesting.wiki.openoffice.org>" >> without actually wanting to use it. >> > > Clueless users manage to do incredible things. See how the spam attack on > the wiki has been understood by some to be a virus on openoffice.org(while of > course being totally unrelated). See how many people, before I > added "If you need to edit pages on this wiki" to the wiki banner, > contacted this list not understanding what a wiki account is needed for. So > it's safer for everybody, and I'd warmly recommend, to put a simple > .htaccess (you can even suggest username and password in the message box, > and they can well be "test" and "wiki"!) on the test wiki, to avoid that it > is indexed by robot.txt-ignoring search engines and attacked by random > bots. It is a very small overhead, and there is concrete possibility that > if we don't do it we will regret. > .htaccess is a real cool and simple idea, wiki is updated. > Regards, > Andrea. >
