on 3/2/01 7:33 PM, "Sam Ruby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The fix is not to check in generated files.
Nope. Sorry. After thinking about it further (as well as outlining the
steps...see below) I'm against this approach *in this case*.
I feel that the risk of accidentally removing a non-checked in directory or
file in the website on the server (yes that is sometimes a case) as a
potential condition of your proposed process is worse than someone editing a
file on the server (which hasn't happened in a really long time and the fact
that the files are checked out makes it easy to figure out that a file is
modified).
I also feel that the number of steps involved is bad. For once, I'm going to
agree with Donald's solution, however instead of not sending the email, I
would like to see an email sent, but with just the top part and not the
actual diff's.
p.s. <smile/> <-- notice I'm getting XML correct now.
thanks,
-jon "The FIRST Pain in the Ass" Stevens
----------
From: Jon Stevens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: "Avalon Development" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2001 15:55:35 -0800
To: Avalon Development <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: www dir.
on 3/1/01 3:38 PM, "Peter Donald" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> yep and because it seems to be policy on jakarta. It is also "safer" when
> updating website because you can version that.
well, you could still keep the website under version control...ie: the
source .xml files are already under version control. the issue is that you
have to not only check out a local copy of the source files and then build
it on the server, but you also have to move them over to the new site.
process for updating the website goes from...
local:
#0. check out cvs tree locally
#1. edit source files
#2. build site
#3. checkin changes to source and "rendered" pages
server:
#4. cvs update -dP
to...
local:
#0. check out cvs tree locally
#1. edit source files
#2. build site
#3. checkin changes to source
server:
#4. checkout site on server
#5. build site
#6. remove old site files (in case you removed a file in the source)
#7. copy files from #6 to site directory.
Of course you could also rsync or scp the built files to the server, but you
still have to worry about #6.
Which one seems like less work and less error prone to you?
-jon
--
If you come from a Perl or PHP background, JSP is a way to take
your pain to new levels. --Anonymous
<http://jakarta.apache.org/velocity/> && <http://java.apache.org/turbine/>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
