Jeff Turner wrote:

> Forrest is in the same boat as FOP when it comes to site updates.  AFAIK,
> there are no docs, but the process is:
>  - Committers commit generated docs to xml-site/targets/{project}
>  - Every X hours, a script updates /www/ or wherever on
>    the live site, from CVS.
> Pretty messy, but this CVS-based site update system has some virtues:
>  - it is pull-based, so fewer security risks

Pull wouldn't require CVS.

>  - site contents can be reverted easily without an admin having to figure
>    out how the doc generation tool works.

This makes sense.

>  - it's there and it works
> Discussions for creating a better site update system should probably be
> held on general@xml, since it affects all projects, or forrest-dev, since
> people there are particularly interested, and Steven has talked with Sam
> about it before.

I have no problem with xml-site/targets/{project} or the CVS-based system
(except for the binary PDF issue mentioned before, which may be
unavoidable). What is a little frustrating is that it seems like we are only
a short script (checkout, copy -r, commit) away from being able to use the
builds that are being done on icarus (or another apache machine) to update
xml-site/targets/{project}, instead of having to do the documentation builds
locally. Is there some reason why we can't just do a copy here?

Victor Mote

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to