> On 13 Apr 2018, at 12:30, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> On 13 April 2018 at 11:22, Jan Iversen <jancasacon...@gmail.com 
> <mailto:jancasacon...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> On 13 Apr 2018, at 12:17, sebb <seb...@gmail.com <mailto:seb...@gmail.com>> 
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> On 13 April 2018 at 11:08,  <j...@apache.org <mailto:j...@apache.org>> 
>>> wrote:
>>>> Hi all
>>>> 
>>>> Sorry for the noise on this list, I am trying to simplify the website, 
>>>> meaning getting rid of the ant generation.
>>> 
>>> What's wrong with Ant ?
>>> Or do you mean Velocity (Anakia, Texen)?
>> I mean the whole generation part.
> 
> And what is wrong with it?

For one it does not run on a tablet, which happens to be my prime work tool. 
Whenever I touch attic I have to access to my Mac in order to run the 
generation.

I would like something that can edited without needing a computer.

> 
>>> 
>>>> The idea is to:
>>>> - have a sidebar file that is included in all files (with projects etc).
>>>> - have a project template, that can be copied and filled out for each new 
>>>> retired project.
>>>> 
>>>> I am not touching the active site, until I have something working, and we 
>>>> have consensus that it is a better solution.
>>> 
>>> If we are going to change the site generation, I suggest we start with
>>> a data file containing all the retired project details and use that to
>>> generate the pages.
>>> That will make it easier to update the individual pages as well as the
>>> include file.
>>> 
>>> Also the data file may be useful for other purposes, so JSON might be
>>> a good format.
>> I was not thinking of “generation”, because we have to few projects entering 
>> attic that is does not have value.
> 
> It will be an initial extra cost, but long term it will make it much
> easier to make changes to the main page bodies.
> As well as providing useful data for external users.
> 
>> I am thinking of making something that can be plainly edited, which would 
>> make life easier, since it can be done directly in a browser without the 
>> need of having special software installed. This is of course also true for 
>> server side generated html, which could be a second step if we agree on it.
> 
> AFAICT your proposal will require editing two files - the main page
> and the include file.
> Whereas I propose a single file is used.

That is a very fair point, and if my php experiment works it should be simple 
to do.

> 
>>> 
>>>> rgds
>>>> Jan I.

Reply via email to