On 22 April 2018 at 14:53, <j...@apache.org> wrote: > Hi > > Looking at the latest emails, it seems like a compromise between the 2 > solutions are the best solution. > > How about if the combine the proposals to the following (that would make my > life easier, and hopefully satisfy the majority of problems Sebb see). > > > Based on site-json I propose the following changes: > > Change docs/scripts/attic.js to project.json (kept as pure json outside docs). > Remove xdocs. > > Allow a build job to monitor for svn changes and if any active a generation > script. > > The generation script does the following: > - generate a sidebar.inc which is included (physically in all files)
Not sure how you mean the inclusion to work. Do you mean a server-side include? That increases the load on the server, but Infra may agree to it. Or would the project.md template be processed to include the contents? > - Generate a page pr. project in projects, based on a 1 template “project.md” > or similar What would convert project.md into projects/project.html? What about the additional data that is present in many of the XML files? Where would that be stored? It's really awkward to put it in projects.json. > - Generate a flagged directory (if field “flag” is present in the JSON > object”) OK. > This solves all URL issues, the concern about JS, all redirection issues as > far as I can see…and (to me) importantly maintenance is updating > projects.json and nothing more (related to the site). > > How do you all feel about this compromise ? I think it is closer, but it does not cover the requirement to preserve the existing additional data in the XML files. > rgds > Jan I. > > Ps. I can help to change attic.js, but I am afraid the generate script is for > someone else to write.
