So I've been in contact with INFRA [1]. They've explained that we can ditch CMS entirely. By going this route we will no longer be able to edit the site online (through the Apache CMS tool) or have the staging capabilities. We would be committing the site into a svn/git repository and it would be available immediately (no staging). What this means is that the staging is going to be done by the person updating the site on the machine they are building on. Once they are comfortable they would deploy the updates by committing into the svn/git repository. The mechanics of this commit haven't been entirely worked out because I didn't know the particulars regarding CMS if we opted for an external build. I am thinking that it can be scripted or integrated into the build tool (grunt).
Additionally, the NiFi maven build could also commit to this svn/git repository to automate the deployment of our user/admin/etc guides. There is currently some discussion about how to automate the deployment of component documentation at build time. Once that is decided, we could automate their deployment as well. Please let me know if there is any opposition to this approach. If I don't hear anything I am going to continue proceeding down this path. [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-9291 On Sat, Mar 21, 2015 at 11:25 AM, Matt Gilman <[email protected]> wrote: > I have not begun working on anything generated from the nifi build yet > (items identified in that ticket). My focus was on the website side of > things and I am currently in a holding pattern. It seems that the > referenced ticket is looking for a workaround in the meantime. > > Without knowing more, I was thinking that once everything was set up for > the website's external build we could use maven to commit the specified > artifacts (maybe something like [1]) into the website's SVN repository and > eliminate the need to generate a tarball that someone would manually have > to upload like we're doing today. > > Matt > > [1] http://maven.apache.org/scm/maven-scm-plugin/checkin-mojo.html > > On Sat, Mar 21, 2015 at 11:12 AM, Joe Witt <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Matt >> >> Rgr that. There are several tickets open which could be part of this >> work: >> >> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-445?jql=project%20%3D%20NIFI%20AND%20status%20in%20(Open%2C%20%22In%20Progress%22%2C%20Reopened)%20AND%20text%20~%20%22website%22 >> >> Which one are you working on? Perhaps we can divide and conquer. >> There are a lot of updates in v1 that are not yet reflected in V2. >> Plus in V2 we need an updated image. So perhaps folks will contribute >> if we can document the needs on the ticket. >> >> Thanks >> Joe >> >> On Sat, Mar 21, 2015 at 11:08 AM, Matt Gilman <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > I've sent a couple emails which dev was CC'ed on. Since I wasn't hearing >> > anything there, I opened a JIRA ticket with them as well [1]. There has >> > been no activity on it yet. I was not aware of any INFRA chatroom. >> > >> > It sounds like when configured for an external build, we just need to >> > commit the website to the SVN repository. It's not clear however, if >> there >> > is still a staging phase or if it's immediately published. These are >> > questions I've asked in emails and in the ticket. The idea is that the >> > website and the application build would be separate but would commit to >> the >> > same repository so the documentation and the website can be can be >> updated >> > and deployed independently. >> > >> > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-9291 >> > >> > On Sat, Mar 21, 2015 at 10:45 AM, Joe Witt <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> >> Matt, Aldrin, >> >> >> >> Just specifying you in particular since you were both actively engaged >> >> on it. But this is really for everyone: >> >> >> >> Can we reengage on the website v2 effort? I believe the last thing I >> >> saw is that some important ticket or action was held up in INFRA. I >> >> know that INFRA has a chatroom they are available in. I think >> >> generally if they fall behind or something falls through the cracks >> >> they don't mind a ping. >> >> >> >> One thing with the change I know was part of the motivation was an >> >> easier/more direct path to making updates. That part wasn't totally >> >> clear to me so will be curious to hear more about how that will work. >> >> As Dan or others have pointed out we need to get a more direct line >> >> from doc changes to getting them deployed. And ideally we'd have the >> >> extensions all up there as well. >> >> >> >> Anyway - just want to get a view on where this is at. >> >> >> >> Thanks >> >> Joe >> >> >> > >
