> On Apr 29, 2021, at 3:58 AM, Gilles Sadowski <gillese...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>> There's no point converting to Git if that process is more involved
>> than the existing process.
>
> I'm not sure that we mean the same with "the existing process".
> Earlier in the thread, I've described what I do:
>
> $ mvn site site:stage
> $ cd site-content
> $ rm -rf *
> $ cd ../target/staging/
> $ cp -r * ../../site-content
> $ cd ../../site-content
> $ svn status
> [Use some commands to "svn add" all the new files and "svn del"
> to remove all the file that do not exist anymore.]
> $ svn commit
>
> What I'd like to know is whether the "process" should be different
> with the current setup.
>
> IIUC, the ".asf.yaml" approach is to create a subdirectory for each
> new version of the web site (in sync with versions of the code).
That is what Log4j does. It did that even when using CMS/SVN. It is not
required nor should it be considered a best practice.
Ralph
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
