Hi Vinod, > *Implementation details: * > > We have an option to move to > 1) a standalone git repo (say "mesos-site") which will be mirrored on > github. > 2) just use our "mesos" git repo and publish a "asf-site" branch with > website contents (say at 'site/publish' directory) > > I'm leaning towards 2) because that allows us to deal with single repo > instead of two.
I have never updated the website so I cannot comment on the pain involved. As a user of the Mesos source git repository I would however like to bring up that _all_ of the website’s assets are generated from files present in the source repository (at some point in time). The largest fraction of the `publish` directory is Doxygen documentation (currently >90% at ~100 MB). We should weigh the effect this would have for developers should we add this content to the Mesos source repository. To get a ballpark idea I imported the website’s history into a git repository. After the initial import its `.git` directory contained ~100 MB which went down to ~30MB after aggressive repository repacking. A fresh clone of the Mesos source repository amounts to ~280 MB, so it seems we would add at least 10% to the repositories size with little benefit to developers. Depending on the implementation, this number would likely increase would we e.g., provide version-dependent website content, or introduce website asset formats not compressing as nicely with git (e.g., generated graphics). I have the feeling keeping this content in a separate repository might strike a better balance for developers. Benjamin
