Yes. If someone wants to use CVS to update a project's webpage, they should not have to change their current workflow at all.
Thanks for answering regardless; it's always great to get as much input as possible on these types of changes! On 7/21/21 7:28 AM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> Cc: savannah-hackers-public@gnu.org >> From: Daniel Katz <danie...@fsf.org> >> Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2021 16:41:38 -0400 >> >> Right now, wildebeest (the gnu.org server) has a collection of scripts >> that grab files from Savannah and put them into the correct place on >> gnu.org. According to rwp, there is one script/CVS hook running on >> Savannah that pings wildebeest but I do not know for sure. I don't have >> access to Savannah and somebody I asked to look through Savannah could >> not find anything related to that. >> >> I plan to modify the scripts to work with both Git and CVS and hope to >> keep rewriting at a minimum. I'm documenting the current system right >> now so I know what needs to be modified and what can stay the same or >> even be deleted. The new system will also be deployed to the new >> Wildebeest server when it's ready. > So you envision no changes to the user side of this, i.e. for those > who edit and update documentation stored on gnu.org/software via CVS? > >> I'd love to talk with anyone who has knowledge of this system! >> >> I'm also wondering if anyone knows of or has access to the CVS >> hook/script that is on Savannah? > Not me, sorry. > > Thanks for working on this.
