On 14/12/2007, Roland Weber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi folks, > > since we'll be moving to our own website soonish, > let's discuss how we're going to structure it. > Erik suggested to copy over parts of the Jakarta > website such as the bylaws. I've taken a look to > identify which of the Jakarta pages may be useful > for us and do not have a corresponding page below > jakarta/httpcomponents/. I found > > 1. the download pages > http://jakarta.apache.org/site/downloads/downloads_httpcomponents-httpcore.cgi > http://jakarta.apache.org/site/downloads/downloads_httpcomponents-httpclient.cgi > http://jakarta.apache.org/site/downloads/downloads_commons-httpclient-3.x.cgi
Also need the corresponding html files. These are both currently autogenerated using XSLT. > 2. Bylaws & Guidelines > http://jakarta.apache.org/site/management.html > http://jakarta.apache.org/site/guidelines.html > + some referenced from guidelines.html > http://jakarta.apache.org/site/mail.html OK - some of this material could perhaps be pushed up to ASF level, but given that Jakarta did not do it... > 3. Contact and Who We Are > http://jakarta.apache.org/site/contact.html > http://jakarta.apache.org/site/whoweare.html OK > Technically, the decision is whether we want to copy and > keep the site deployment process used at Jakarta, or whether > we want to switch to a completely mavenized site deployment. > I have no concerns about parts 2 and 3, but I can't tell > how easy or hard it is to fit part 1 into Maven. We'd also > need a place to put the .htaccess file for the site, but > I trust that can be handled by Maven. > > From a content structure point of view, that decision > translates to being HttpComponents [1] with an HttpClient 3.1 > attachment [2], or being a project which has HttpComponents > and HttpClient 3.1 on the same level (and 3 look&feels). > > [1] http://jakarta.apache.org/httpcomponents/index.html > [2] http://jakarta.apache.org/httpcomponents/httpclient-3.x/index.html > > If it wasn't for part 1 above and my mistrust of Maven, > I'd clearly opt for the completely mavenized version. > But the Jakarta site deployment process, which transfers > generated pages to the site via SVN, somehow gives me a > better feeling than the Maven style which just copies > everything over to the server in a big bunch. > Indeed - there does not seem to be an SVN copy of the site with Maven, so if it gets lost/damaged it has to be regenerated as far as I can tell. The Jakarta way makes it easy; can get everything ready in SVN first, and then update the site. It's also easy to detect if the site files have been editted directly; as the Maven stuff is not in SVN there's no easy way to check for changed, missing or additional files. But perhaps one can combine the two approaches? Use Maven to generate the site, and rather than upload it directly, store it in SVN. > On a related matter, what paths are we going to use? > If we don't copy the Jakarta site deployment, we'll > probably collapse jakarta.a.o/httpcomponents/ to > hc.a.o/. The individual components would then still > have the full project names in the paths: > http://hc.apache.org/httpcomponents-core/index.html > http://hc.apache.org/httpcomponents-client/index.html > > And what is your preferred pathname for the 3.1 site? > http://hc.apache.org/httpclient-3.x/index.html +1 > http://hc.apache.org/commons-httpclient/index.html OK, but prefer previous. > ... > > cheers, > Roland > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
