On 24 March 2016 at 01:19, Dan Espen <des...@verizon.net> wrote:
>> Thomas Adam <tho...@fvwm.org> writes:
>> See previous paragraph, I do not think this is the right approach at all.
> I don't see the difference.
> Right now Jason pulls from CVS to build the pages at fvwm.org.
> He said he's willing to pull from Git instead.
> So, the fvwm-web can be in CVS or GIT, it doesn't matter,
> we just need Jason to decide where he wants to pull from.

Well, it makes all the difference, actually.  There's no need to pull
from anything if the eventual aim is to switch over to the fvwm-web
repository on Github.  One of the reasons for doing this way is it's
not only easy to set up, but it means _we_ as fvwm-workers@ don't need
to have the overhead of hosting it ourselves.

We can leave the fvwm-web version on fvwm.org as is, and just redirect
to fvwmorg.github.io as needed, when the work on the website is

Note that I can't remember if I've mentioned it already, but the
current "building" phase of the website relies on files from the fvwm
repository.  This will have to change, notably:

* We no longer need a NEWS file or Changelog---yes, we can have NEWS
items, but we'll have to handle that differently to how we do now.
* The FAQ is same; that file should be moved out of the fvwm
repository and into the website repository, ideally converted to use
Markdown---I've already done this to some of the files in the fvwm
repository, should you need an example.

> That's just great.


> I was married in 1964.
> I'm retiring as of March 31.

Oh, congratulations to you, too!  Do you have plans for your retirement, Dan?


Reply via email to