I think #2 would be necessary when we start doing concurrent releases of the same project; e.g., Log4j `2.34.0` and `3.2.0`. I really liked the single-use staging domains *you* proposed due to the conveniences it enables and I would rather keep it.
On Mon, Oct 23, 2023 at 2:03 PM Piotr P. Karwasz <piotr.karw...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Volkan, > > On Sun, 22 Oct 2023 at 23:47, Volkan Yazıcı <vol...@yazi.ci> wrote: > > 2. Instead of using logging.*staged.*apache.org*/foo*, we will use > > logging*-foo.staged.*apache.org for staging websites. > > 3. Log4j Scala, Kotlin, Tools, and Transformation website content will > > be moved from `logging-log4j-site` repository to > `logging-log4j-scala`, > > `logging-log4j-kotlin`, `logging-log4j-tools`, and > > `logging-log4j-transformation` repositories, respectively. > > If we implement 3, 2 will become optional: as long as each project is > on a separate Git repo/branch staging should be easy. > > Piotr >
