On Jue, 26 de Mayo de 2005, 5:49, David Crossley dijo:
David Crossley wrote:
We have now been allocated a zone on the new server.
So we need to define our goals and then start setting up
some demo servers. We should get out of this RT thread
and start planning. But lets concentrate on the 0.7
David Crossley wrote:
David Crossley wrote:
We have now been allocated a zone on the new server.
So we need to define our goals and then start setting up
some demo servers. We should get out of this RT thread
and start planning. But lets concentrate on the 0.7
release first.
What do people
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
One thing I like about Forrest is that it's not only a static site
generation engine, but it's capable of serving the site live. Changes
are instantaneous, bandwith is perserved, and dynamic content can be
employed.
IMHO every Apache project that produces
Torsten Schlabach wrote:
Nicola,
My goal is to put a live Forrest on ASF infrastructure instead of the
bot and have that serve all Forrest-based sites in Apache, comprising
Lenya.
Sounds good. Let me know if you need any help or input from us.
Are you subsribed to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
David Crossley wrote:
Torsten Schlabach wrote:
Nicola,
My goal is to put a live Forrest on ASF infrastructure instead of the
bot and have that serve all Forrest-based sites in Apache, comprising
Lenya.
Sounds good. Let me know if you need any help or input from us.
Are you subsribed to [EMAIL
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
One thing I like about Forrest is that it's not only a static site
generation engine, but it's capable of serving the site live. Changes
are instantaneous, bandwith is perserved, and dynamic content can be
employed.
IMHO every Apache project that produces something
I think it would be very useful to do the tests you suggested to get
some first hand figures on performance and stability and learn more
about the practical details of running it.
Most of all because I expect all the happy Forrest clients (that are
using static Forrests now?!) to ask for the
Nicola,
My goal is to put a live Forrest on ASF infrastructure instead of the
bot and have that serve all Forrest-based sites in Apache, comprising
Lenya.
Sounds good. Let me know if you need any help or input from us.
Are you subsribed to [EMAIL PROTECTED] There is a rush for
Solaris zones on
Apache is getting more hardware donated lately, so it may be that we
get to use it. In any case, I don't want to ask for the usage of it if
we don't yet know what to do with it, hence the RT.
Before making the full move and serve the websites entirely dynamically,
how about providing a
Torsten Schlabach wrote:
Apache is getting more hardware donated lately, so it may be that we
get to use it. In any case, I don't want to ask for the usage of it if
we don't yet know what to do with it, hence the RT.
Before making the full move and serve the websites entirely dynamically,
Ross Gardler wrote:
...
Whilst I totally agree with the sentiment of this RT, can I ask one
simple question before even starting on this discussion:
Where will we be able to host a live version of Forrest?
Apache is getting more hardware donated lately, so it may be that we get
to use it. In
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
Ross Gardler wrote:
...
Whilst I totally agree with the sentiment of this RT, can I ask one
simple question before even starting on this discussion:
Where will we be able to host a live version of Forrest?
Apache is getting more hardware donated lately, so it may be
One thing I like about Forrest is that it's not only a static site
generation engine, but it's capable of serving the site live. Changes
are instantaneous, bandwith is perserved, and dynamic content can be
employed.
IMHO every Apache project that produces something it can use for itself
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
One thing I like about Forrest is that it's not only a static site
generation engine, but it's capable of serving the site live. Changes
are instantaneous, bandwith is perserved, and dynamic content can be
employed.
IMHO every Apache project that produces something it
14 matches
Mail list logo
