On 4 May 2015, at 15:07, Ted Dunning wrote:
There are really two roles here.
One is where you keep the source of the web site. The other is where
you
keep the pre-processed static HTML that is actually delivered to
users.
One common pattern is to store the source in a special branch in the
main
project repo and store the static HTML in a separate repo. To some
degree,
this pattern is an artifact.
Yes, I follow you here. So far we did have a branch ("documentation")
that contained the source of the website (along with all the other
sources) and the static HTML lived somewhere else. Now we'd like to put
the static HTML into another git repository and use gitpubsub to publish
it.
It should also be possible to simply follow the github practice of
using a
special branch (called gh-pages) and having the gitpubsub script do
all of
the conversion to static html. I am not clear on whether that is
supported
yet.
The gh-pages convention works great, but is a bit strange at first.
The
great advantage it has is not intrinsic, but has to do mostly with the
fact
that it allows you to use github as a preview mechanism.
I'm not sure I follow here (but many that's due to the fact that I don't
understand the GitHub feature). Something needs to happen between the
source and the static HTML (in our case the maven site plugin does it)
and gitpubsub probably doesn't do that.
So who does it?
Thanks,
Till
On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 8:25 PM, Ian Maxon <[email protected]> wrote:
It definitely should be it's own repository, in my mind at least.
-Ian
On Sun, May 3, 2015 at 2:34 PM, Mike Carey <[email protected]> wrote:
+1 for a specific one....
On 5/3/15 1:08 PM, Till Westmann wrote:
When using gitpubsub one can either use an existing git repository
or
have a specific one just for the site.
Right now it seems to me that it would be better to have a specific
repository as
a) it avoids checking build artifacts into the source repository
and
b) it’s a little cleaner than putting the site into either the
asterixdb
or the hyracks repo.
Thoughts? Other opinions?
Thanks,
Till
On May 3, 2015, at 9:13 AM, Till Westmann <[email protected]> wrote:
Yes, thanks!
I didn't know we could but after your mail I found humbedooh's
blog
post
[1].
That seems to be the better way.
Cheers,
Till
[1]
https://blogs.apache.org/infra/entry/git_based_websites_available
On May 3, 2015, at 07:41, Jochen Wiedmann
<[email protected]>
wrote:
Seeing as the project is using Git for source code, I'd suggest
trying
gitpubsub instead.
On Sun, May 3, 2015 at 1:36 AM, Till Westmann <[email protected]>
wrote:
Hi,
now that the code is imported, we should be able to build and
deploy
a
site.
I’ve created a request [1] to create an SVN repository, so
that we
can
deploy the site via svnpubsub.
Cheers,
Till
[1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-9579
--
Any world that can produce the Taj Mahal, William Shakespeare,
and Stripe toothpaste can't be all bad. (C.R. MacNamara, One Two
Three)
