Noel J. Bergman ha scritto: > Stefano Bagnara wrote: >> We moved from the mailing list to the blog because mailing list are >> "write-once" and we are not allowed to review the content (moderation >> is done by a single moderator anyway). > > Simple solution: post the announcement as a draft to the dev@ list for > review.
This would make the workflow even more complex than now IMHO. Now I have to 1) commit to an xml in svn 2) build the m2 site 3) commit the generated site to svn 4) svn up on minotaur After 1 and after 3 we get a notification that allow people to review and eventually ask to fix it (or fix it). If we introduce this announcement draft it is 2 more steps to be included (as I previously said every time I published a news I also needed to publish some other website update) in the workflow and much more delay in publishing as it become RTC instead of CTR and we know that review can also take weeks in JAMES. That said, this is just my opinion. If this change complicate my life but simplify the workflow for most of others then let's do it. We can switch back if it does not work (there are 2 majority-based votes still open, and they can help understanding what majority wants). I bet less active committers are confused by our message floods :-/ > I agree that we want a simple way to post news. For years, we have > neglected the site, and just posted announcements to the mailing list. Once > or twice every other year, someone would update the news area of the site. > Again, I agree with Danny's goal entirely. And if you notice, in another > e-mail I've asked you a specific question about process, and agreed that it > could be at least an interim approach. You asked for this process at least 4 times in 3 messages (in 10 minutes) and I was already sleeping :-) I now replied to one of the messages. Feel free to ask for more details if needed. >> Danny showed us a javascript > > Yes: > > <script src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/apache-james?format=sigpro"; > type="text/javascript" /> > > Separate issue, but I like Javascript *almost* as much as I like Maven. I > have to deal with it daily, but I am in the anti-camp due to security > issues. Sure, *I* can selectively enable/disable Javascript, but I don't > want to subject the general community to security vulnerabilities (enabling > Javascript) just for the sake of a news feed on our home page. > > I do like what Danny accomplished. As I said in another e-mail, I want to > see the news integrated into our site, and Paul Querna had also suggested > feedburner. But he suggested that it be used to generate static HTML, not > used as above. There has to be a better way than Javascript. Let's find > it. > > I'll be looking for details on your proposed workflow. Again, not against a > nice workflow for publishing news. Against an external URL, and against > Javascript for security reasons. > > --- Noel The confluence solution does not need external URLs, does not use javascript (on the published side) and does not brake cwiki's first rule (aren't you a geronimo PMC member? they do the confluence exporting stuff, too). BTW I think we are on a loop: I summarized the 4 options that have been discussed so far in the previous message. Stefano
