> On 22 Apr 2018, at 11:33, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 22 April 2018 at 09:54, Jan Iversen <jancasacon...@gmail.com > <mailto:jancasacon...@gmail.com>> wrote: >> >> >>> On 22 Apr 2018, at 10:17, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> On 21 April 2018 at 12:57, <j...@apache.org> wrote: >>>> Hi. >>>> >>>> After having studied the solution proposed by Sebb, I have decided to add >>>> my proposal again. >>>> >>>> My proposal has one outstanding TODO: >>>> - add a .htaccess to projects that catches * and redirect to >>>> attic.js?<project> >>> >>> That needs testing to ensure it works properly. >> Just as with your solution, testing is always needed. That is the reason I >> did not touch any production files, but added test.html > > For proper comparison I think we need to see the whole solution. > This will obviously have to be done so that it does not impact the live site. I believe the sample I have made with test.html and generation of all project files are sufficient. No need to waste more time on that. Time saving is important to me, and it does not make sense to waste resources on making two complete solutions just to scrap one of them.
The real key here which person will do the maintenance in the future. As the person who have done the maintenance in the past and if nothing changes will continue to do so, I believe it is fair to make a system that makes my life easier. If of course needs to be a system, that can be easy handled in case I need a substitute. In the case I am not supposed to do the maintenance in the future my opinions carry a lot less weight. > > Which is why I created the branch; this contains everything needed to > set up the website. > I have been able to test it locally. Well you can also test it live, as I do www.attic.org/test.html <http://www.attic.org/test.html> > >>> >>>> - change attic.js to use project name instead of a number >>>> Apart from that my solution is working, and seen from the outside the >>>> Attic site is identical, responding to the same url as before. >>> >>> Apart from: >>> The non-project HTML file resolution.html does not use the new list of >>> projects >> It will, look in test.html then you can see how that will be done in the >> production files that non-project. >> >>> The project/* files don't allow for additional info such as is present >>> in some of the existing XML files >> It actually does, just add that information to the description field. > > OK, so try that with Taglibs. Quite hard to do, as we do not have Taglibs as a retired project. > >> >>> The site does not work if a client does not support Javascript >> Correct, but nowadays that is hardly a problem. > > We still need to support such clients. I beg to differ. We also do not support all old browser applications (like the ones who only support HTML 1), somewhere you have to set a limit. rgds Jan I. > >>> >>>> The proposal from Sebb, involves new technology (Jekyll, YAML, bot) as >>>> well as a markdown file pr project and are also working. >>>> >>>> Can we please have an open discussion to choose between these 2 variants >>>> and if needed (which I hope we can avoid) a vote. >>>> >>>> — >>>> My pow: >>>> >>>> JS is not the best solution I preferred PHP, but needed in order to have a >>>> static server side. The JSON embedded in attic.js is valid json, and easy >>>> to extract with a simple sed, should anybody need it. >>>> >>>> The solution from Sebb introduces a number of new technologies, and adds a >>>> bot that runs and eat resources. >>>> >>>> As the one who have done the maintenance the last year, I look for a >>>> solution where we update a single file, and avoid complications (like >>>> looking after a build job). >>>> >>>> — >>>> >>>> Please add your comments and let aim at making a decision this month. >>>> >>>> Have a nice weekend >>>> rgds >>>> Jan I.
