Still no response from infra https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-5657
So I don't know how to start importing content...
What to do is:
* upgrade to parent 28-SNAPSHOT
* add a property exec which
contains the project path relative to commons.a.o
And that's it :-)
parent will need a chan
On 12/18/12 2:32 PM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
> 2012/12/18 Olivier Lamy :
>> 2012/12/18 Ralph Goers :
>>> On Dec 18, 2012, at 2:11 PM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
>>>
2012/12/18 Ralph Goers :
> On Dec 18, 2012, at 1:03 PM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
>
>> Maybe could be simpler with committing your sta
2012/12/18 Olivier Lamy :
> 2012/12/18 Ralph Goers :
>>
>> On Dec 18, 2012, at 2:11 PM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
>>
>>> 2012/12/18 Ralph Goers :
On Dec 18, 2012, at 1:03 PM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
>>
> Maybe could be simpler with committing your staged versionned site to
> log4j2
2012/12/18 Ralph Goers :
>
> On Dec 18, 2012, at 2:11 PM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
>
>> 2012/12/18 Ralph Goers :
>>>
>>> On Dec 18, 2012, at 1:03 PM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
>>>
>
Maybe could be simpler with committing your staged versionned site to
log4j2-xxx (tru the maven plugin) for review
On Dec 18, 2012, at 2:11 PM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
> 2012/12/18 Ralph Goers :
>>
>> On Dec 18, 2012, at 1:03 PM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
>>
>>> Maybe could be simpler with committing your staged versionned site to
>>> log4j2-xxx (tru the maven plugin) for review and then modifying
>>> .htaccess
2012/12/18 Ralph Goers :
>
> On Dec 18, 2012, at 1:03 PM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
>
>>>
>> Maybe could be simpler with committing your staged versionned site to
>> log4j2-xxx (tru the maven plugin) for review and then modifying
>> .htaccess file (too prevent huge checkout on your machine and to
>> modi
On Dec 18, 2012, at 1:03 PM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
>>
> Maybe could be simpler with committing your staged versionned site to
> log4j2-xxx (tru the maven plugin) for review and then modifying
> .htaccess file (too prevent huge checkout on your machine and to
> modify a symlink this probably won't
2012/12/18 Ralph Goers :
>
> On Dec 18, 2012, at 1:03 PM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
>
>> 2012/12/18 Ralph Goers :
>>>
>>> On Dec 18, 2012, at 12:18 PM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
>>>
2012/12/18 Ralph Goers :
>
> On Dec 18, 2012, at 9:10 AM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
>
>> 2012/12/18 Ralph Goers :
On Dec 18, 2012, at 1:03 PM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
> 2012/12/18 Ralph Goers :
>>
>> On Dec 18, 2012, at 12:18 PM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
>>
>>> 2012/12/18 Ralph Goers :
On Dec 18, 2012, at 9:10 AM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
> 2012/12/18 Ralph Goers :
>> I still don't understand wh
2012/12/18 Ralph Goers :
>
> On Dec 18, 2012, at 12:18 PM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
>
>> 2012/12/18 Ralph Goers :
>>>
>>> On Dec 18, 2012, at 9:10 AM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
>>>
2012/12/18 Ralph Goers :
> I still don't understand why you are committing the subprojects to svn.
> That is not r
On Dec 18, 2012, at 12:18 PM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
> 2012/12/18 Ralph Goers :
>>
>> On Dec 18, 2012, at 9:10 AM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
>>
>>> 2012/12/18 Ralph Goers :
I still don't understand why you are committing the subprojects to svn.
That is not required. Just use stage-deploy to
2012/12/18 Ralph Goers :
>
> On Dec 18, 2012, at 9:10 AM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
>
>> 2012/12/18 Ralph Goers :
>>> I still don't understand why you are committing the subprojects to svn.
>>> That is not required. Just use stage-deploy to deploy to a local directory
>>> on your computer, then copy
extpaths.txt operates by saying that everything under the subdirectories named
in it is excluded from the CMS and must be manually managed. So what Logging
does is have the main site be managed in the CMS. The links in the parent
project point to generic project directories that are symlinks.
Let me see if I understand. Are you saying, Ralph, that when we have
generated content to expose on the website, we should commit it directly to
the production website svn and mark it in extpaths.txt back in our tree in
mainrepo, basically because that avoids the duplication that is created by
sto
On Dec 18, 2012, at 9:10 AM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
> 2012/12/18 Ralph Goers :
>> I still don't understand why you are committing the subprojects to svn.
>> That is not required. Just use stage-deploy to deploy to a local directory
>> on your computer, then copy that under where you have the pro
2012/12/18 Ralph Goers :
> I still don't understand why you are committing the subprojects to svn. That
> is not required. Just use stage-deploy to deploy to a local directory on
> your computer, then copy that under where you have the production web site
> checked out and check it in. See
>
I still don't understand why you are committing the subprojects to svn. That
is not required. Just use stage-deploy to deploy to a local directory on your
computer, then copy that under where you have the production web site checked
out and check it in. See http://wiki.apache.org/logging/Mana
2012/12/18 Olivier Lamy :
> 2012/12/18 Phil Steitz :
>> On 12/17/12 5:55 AM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
>>> ETA of the migration:
>>> collections and lang done.
>>>
>>> results:
>>> * http://people.apache.org/~olamy/commons/lang/
>>> * http://people.apache.org/~olamy/commons/collections/
>>>
>>> As Gary s
2012/12/18 Phil Steitz :
> On 12/17/12 5:55 AM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
>> ETA of the migration:
>> collections and lang done.
>>
>> results:
>> * http://people.apache.org/~olamy/commons/lang/
>> * http://people.apache.org/~olamy/commons/collections/
>>
>> As Gary suggested old javadocs are
>> http://p
On 12/17/12 5:55 AM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
> ETA of the migration:
> collections and lang done.
>
> results:
> * http://people.apache.org/~olamy/commons/lang/
> * http://people.apache.org/~olamy/commons/collections/
>
> As Gary suggested old javadocs are
> http://people.apache.org/~olamy/commons/lang
ETA of the migration:
collections and lang done.
results:
* http://people.apache.org/~olamy/commons/lang/
* http://people.apache.org/~olamy/commons/collections/
As Gary suggested old javadocs are
http://people.apache.org/~olamy/commons/lang/javadocs
NOTE I didn't import all previous versions. Do
2012/12/15 Olivier Lamy :
> 2012/12/15 Ralph Goers :
>> And now I'm even more confused since I just saw your commits to build the
>> CMS site using Maven.
> I started with main site and as I'm in eu I wanted to sleep a bit :-).
> I will try to work on sub projects today (it's only a matter of
> co
2012/12/15 Ralph Goers :
> And now I'm even more confused since I just saw your commits to build the CMS
> site using Maven.
I started with main site and as I'm in eu I wanted to sleep a bit :-).
I will try to work on sub projects today (it's only a matter of
configuring parent pom normally)
And t
2012/12/15 Ralph Goers :
> So now I'm confused. You are proposing to bypass the CMS altogether and only
> publish to the live site. Why? Even projects like Flume that use maven for
> the site build still do it in the CMS.
>
Nope I propose to use both. very similar as flume, maven (maybe others
And now I'm even more confused since I just saw your commits to build the CMS
site using Maven.
Ralph
On Dec 14, 2012, at 6:35 PM, Ralph Goers wrote:
> So now I'm confused. You are proposing to bypass the CMS altogether and only
> publish to the live site. Why? Even projects like Flume that
So now I'm confused. You are proposing to bypass the CMS altogether and only
publish to the live site. Why? Even projects like Flume that use maven for
the site build still do it in the CMS.
Ralph
On Dec 14, 2012, at 4:33 PM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
> 2012/12/15 Olivier Lamy :
>> 2012/12/15 Mat
2012/12/15 Olivier Lamy :
> 2012/12/15 Matt Benson :
>> Olivier,
>> Thanks for your response and offer to contribute! We do have a few
>> multi-module components here. Of "proper" components, there is only [jci]
>> that I know of, but [proxy]'s 2.0 branch is multimodule, and we had
>> intended
2012/12/15 Matt Benson :
> Olivier,
> Thanks for your response and offer to contribute! We do have a few
> multi-module components here. Of "proper" components, there is only [jci]
> that I know of, but [proxy]'s 2.0 branch is multimodule, and we had
> intended to take [functor] multimodule bef
Olivier,
Thanks for your response and offer to contribute! We do have a few
multi-module components here. Of "proper" components, there is only [jci]
that I know of, but [proxy]'s 2.0 branch is multimodule, and we had
intended to take [functor] multimodule before a release is made. I'm
perusin
/me listening here
Note maven.apache.org has been migrated this week.
If you want to mix cms and maven site generation, we do that.
Note: even the main site is generated with a maven build but we can
edit files (apt/xdoc/markdown) with the cms editor
The source tree need some modifications: see
I never questioned that the individual components would most likely
continue with the Maven-generated content. I do question whether we want
to bother laying out the main site when we have something that works.
br,
Matt
On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 4:07 PM, Gilles Sadowski <
gil...@harfang.homelinux
On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 03:52:17PM -0600, Matt Benson wrote:
> I've just added the directory to our svn tree so that there would be
> someplace at which to point it. I think the next step is to determine
> whether we want a "normal" CMS site like Logging has, in which case we
> could prop somethin
I've just added the directory to our svn tree so that there would be
someplace at which to point it. I think the next step is to determine
whether we want a "normal" CMS site like Logging has, in which case we
could prop something up with e.g. Twitter bootstrap as is becoming quite
popular among A
Hi.
On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 03:12:31PM -0600, Matt Benson wrote:
> I've been talking to Joe S. on #asfinfra about this; rather than using a
> test site infra would prefer we request the CMS site, just not exposed to
> commons.a.o until we're satisfied with it. Do we want to use the CMS a la
> Apa
I've been talking to Joe S. on #asfinfra about this; rather than using a
test site infra would prefer we request the CMS site, just not exposed to
commons.a.o until we're satisfied with it. Do we want to use the CMS a la
Apache Logging, or do we want to explore keeping the main site
Maven-generate
At the very least, someone should file a Jira asking for a commons-test site.
Ralph
On Dec 10, 2012, at 10:14 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
> On 12/10/12 5:10 PM, Ralph Goers wrote:
>> On Dec 10, 2012, at 4:12 PM, sebb wrote:
>>
>>> On 10 December 2012 21:53, Phil Steitz wrote:
On 12/10/12 1:27
On 12/10/12 5:10 PM, Ralph Goers wrote:
> On Dec 10, 2012, at 4:12 PM, sebb wrote:
>
>> On 10 December 2012 21:53, Phil Steitz wrote:
>>> On 12/10/12 1:27 PM, Ralph Goers wrote:
Yes, I think you are missing something fundamental.
If you check in "the whole mess" you will never again
On Dec 10, 2012, at 4:12 PM, sebb wrote:
> On 10 December 2012 21:53, Phil Steitz wrote:
>> On 12/10/12 1:27 PM, Ralph Goers wrote:
>>> Yes, I think you are missing something fundamental.
>>>
>>> If you check in "the whole mess" you will never again be able to properly
>>> build a sub-project'
On 10 December 2012 21:53, Phil Steitz wrote:
> On 12/10/12 1:27 PM, Ralph Goers wrote:
>> Yes, I think you are missing something fundamental.
>>
>> If you check in "the whole mess" you will never again be able to properly
>> build a sub-project's site with Maven. This is because the process of
On 12/10/12 1:27 PM, Ralph Goers wrote:
> Yes, I think you are missing something fundamental.
>
> If you check in "the whole mess" you will never again be able to properly
> build a sub-project's site with Maven. This is because the process of
> updating the site would require first doing a diff
Ralph,
Thanks for your response, and sorry if I'm still being dense, but let's
just use the [lang] component as an example. Why can't I, at any point,
generate the component's site locally, then surgically modify svn so that
lang/ from the content root now contains the generated content? Where
Yes, I think you are missing something fundamental.
If you check in "the whole mess" you will never again be able to properly build
a sub-project's site with Maven. This is because the process of updating the
site would require first doing a diff and then deleting items that are not
included i
I don't think there's much percentage in moving to the CMS with a structure
like that of Commons. That said, checking in the whole mess, as Phil
suggests, seems perfectly doable and should not preclude updating parts of
the tree in quite a similar fashion as how updating a given component's
site i
On 12/10/12 11:40 AM, Phil Steitz wrote:
> On 12/10/12 10:50 AM, Ralph Goers wrote:
>> All the sub-sites are hooked off the main site. I would have no idea how to
>> migrate anything without migrating the main site first.
> Having now looked at [1], it looks to me like we can solve the
> immediat
On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 8:40 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
> On 12/10/12 10:50 AM, Ralph Goers wrote:
>> All the sub-sites are hooked off the main site. I would have no idea how to
>> migrate anything without migrating the main site first.
>
> Having now looked at [1], it looks to me like we can solve
On 12/10/12 10:50 AM, Ralph Goers wrote:
> All the sub-sites are hooked off the main site. I would have no idea how to
> migrate anything without migrating the main site first.
Having now looked at [1], it looks to me like we can solve the
immediate problem using svn pub-sub. The docs are not c
On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 7:50 PM, Ralph Goers wrote:
> All the sub-sites are hooked off the main site. I would have no idea how to
> migrate anything without migrating the main site first.
>
> I suppose it is possible to point to the sub-sites in their current location
> but in logging we found
They should all be built w/ Maven AFAIK.
Matt
On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 12:50 PM, Ralph Goers wrote:
> All the sub-sites are hooked off the main site. I would have no idea how
> to migrate anything without migrating the main site first.
>
> I suppose it is possible to point to the sub-sites in t
All the sub-sites are hooked off the main site. I would have no idea how to
migrate anything without migrating the main site first.
I suppose it is possible to point to the sub-sites in their current location
but in logging we found it more beneficial to simply copy the content under the
main
On 12/10/12 7:55 AM, Ralph Goers wrote:
> That is what we did in logging. Changing it at the end is fairly easy.
> However, we don't have much time for testing.
Do we really have to do it all at once?
IIUC (which is quite possibly false), the intent here is to get
everyone onto svn pub-sub and
That is what we did in logging. Changing it at the end is fairly easy.
However, we don't have much time for testing.
Ralph
On Dec 10, 2012, at 4:34 AM, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 1:32 PM, Gary Gregory wrote:
>> Well, we have to start somewhere. This is going to be a
Hm... or publish to SVN until we have it all and then switch, until then
the site will be static.
G
On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 7:34 AM, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 1:32 PM, Gary Gregory
> wrote:
> > Well, we have to start somewhere. This is going to be a lot of work,
> >
On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 1:32 PM, Gary Gregory wrote:
> Well, we have to start somewhere. This is going to be a lot of work,
> we have many components, unless you see a short cut.
I thought we would create: commons-test.apache.org
move all components to there and then make a switch from
commons.ap
Well, we have to start somewhere. This is going to be a lot of work,
we have many components, unless you see a short cut.
Gary
On Dec 10, 2012, at 7:13, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 1:07 PM, Gary Gregory wrote:
>> Bah, let's pick one component and start there and skip a
On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 1:07 PM, Gary Gregory wrote:
> Bah, let's pick one component and start there and skip a test site.
But then there is only one component visible under the new commons.a.o?
> Gary
>
> On Dec 10, 2012, at 3:08, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
>
>> starting from 1. January. Just
Bah, let's pick one component and start there and skip a test site.
Gary
On Dec 10, 2012, at 3:08, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
> starting from 1. January. Just saw a final reminder from Infra.
>
> Commons is surely a LOT of work.
>
> I would like to suggest we act immediately.
>
> In other terms
On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 09:07:32AM +0100, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
> starting from 1. January. Just saw a final reminder from Infra.
>
> Commons is surely a LOT of work.
>
> I would like to suggest we act immediately.
>
> In other terms: let us request a commons-test cms where we can try thing
starting from 1. January. Just saw a final reminder from Infra.
Commons is surely a LOT of work.
I would like to suggest we act immediately.
In other terms: let us request a commons-test cms where we can try things
out and prepare the new sites.
As Ralph Goers has already mentioned, we have a s
58 matches
Mail list logo
