Re: Current FlexJS license/notice issues

[Justin Mclean]

Hi,

> Assuming "Fix header" means "notify upstream" and work with the third
> party project until they are satisfied, feel free to do so, but I think
> you are doing so as an individual, not as a representative of the ASF or
> the Apache Flex PMC.

Fix header means correct the issue with the header and notify upstream. I 
mentioned both in my email.

I would be representing the Flex project with my Flex PMC hat on. Why would 
there an issue with that? There’s consensus on what action is required on legal 
discuss, or do you disagree with that? I think it would encourage them to make 
the changes if I explain where and how their code is being used.

> Add header to where?

Any source files that originally came from them that has a missing header.

>  I assume you are planning to contact design modo as well?

Yes as I stated in my email. see a few lines below which you also included in 
your reply.

>> I’ll also ask upstream to fix any issues i.e. missing headers for OpenFL
>> and missing license and copyright clarification for FlatUI.

Thanks,
Justin

Re: AW: AW: [DISCUSS] Switch the site repo to GIT?

[Alex Harui]

I poked around a bit more, and remain confused.

-Looks like folks already use Jekyll at Apache.  Is Jekyll different from
gitpubsub or a component of it?
-Is use of Maven to convert source to html an alternative to using Jekyll
or does Maven call Jekyll?
-Does gitpubsub also go to a staging server for final approval before
being "published"?  That's the way our workflow is today and IMO, 99% of
the time it is wasteful.  I'd like to be able to just push html and xml
files straight to the web server.  There's gotta be another way to "stage"
stuff, maybe just in a different folder.
-Is the asf-site branch an orphan branch like GH pages recommends?
-Could each of our code repos also have an asf-site branch similar to what
GH pages recommends?  If so, then maybe we don't have to rely on GH pages
and URLs.  Maybe we can replicate that sort of workflow at the ASF repo
URLs.  
-Having GH pages URLs if you are viewing our code on GH doesn't bother me.
 As long as we have a backup plan if GH becomes 'undesirable'.

IMO, the priorities are:
1) source control for website so we can rollback changes if needed
2) a way to 'prototype' before going live
3) a way to push html files direct to the server.

Whether we use Markdown or AsciiDoc doesn't matter too much to me.  Using
both is ok too, IMO.

-Alex

Re: Current FlexJS license/notice issues

[Alex Harui]

On 10/2/16, 6:09 PM, "Justin Mclean"  wrote:

>Hi,
>
>The discussion on legal-discuss has died down [1] and this as I see it
>the consensus:
>1. Notify upstream and ask them to fix their issue.
>2. Only parts of the license that relate to what is actually bundled
>needs to be included.
>3. When missing retrospectively adding headers and copyright for a 3rd
>party file is recommended (but not required).
>4. Where copyright is not clear add a header but not the copyright line.
>
>So given the above are their any objections for me to:
>- Fix header and copyright for OpenFL
>- Fix header and copyright for CreateJS

Assuming "Fix header" means "notify upstream" and work with the third
party project until they are satisfied, feel free to do so, but I think
you are doing so as an individual, not as a representative of the ASF or
the Apache Flex PMC.

>- Add header but not copyright for FlatUI (see discussion below)

Add header to where?  I assume you are planning to contact designmodo as
well?


-Alex

>
>I’ll also ask upstream to fix any issues i.e. missing headers for OpenFL
>and missing license and copyright clarification for FlatUI.
>
>For FlatUI there are 14 contributors to the repo [2] one main one (who
>looks to be no longer involved) and 3 other significant ones. There’s no
>obvious connection between them and designmodo (that I could find) other
>than they contributed to this repo. The license was originally CC BY 3.0
>but changed to MIT in 2013 early in the projects history. [3] Their web
>site does claim copyright [4] but copyright is not stated on the github
>repo (even under the copyright and license section) [5]. So while it may
>be reasonable to assume designmodo are the copyright owners it's
>certainly possible that the other contributors have claims as well and it
>may be that all copyright holders did not give permission for their code
>to be relicensed.
>
>Thanks,
>Justin
>
>1. 
>https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/www-legal-discuss/201609.mbox/%3
>cd4077465.75c8d%25aha...@adobe.com%3e
>2. https://github.com/designmodo/Flat-UI/graphs/contributors
>3. https://github.com/designmodo/Flat-UI/issues/18
>4. http://designmodo.com/flat-free/
>5. https://github.com/designmodo/Flat-UI

Re: Current FlexJS license/notice issues

[Justin Mclean]

Hi,

The discussion on legal-discuss has died down [1] and this as I see it the 
consensus:
1. Notify upstream and ask them to fix their issue.
2. Only parts of the license that relate to what is actually bundled needs to 
be included.
3. When missing retrospectively adding headers and copyright for a 3rd party 
file is recommended (but not required).
4. Where copyright is not clear add a header but not the copyright line.

So given the above are their any objections for me to:
- Fix header and copyright for OpenFL
- Fix header and copyright for CreateJS
- Add header but not copyright for FlatUI (see discussion below)

I’ll also ask upstream to fix any issues i.e. missing headers for OpenFL and 
missing license and copyright clarification for FlatUI.

For FlatUI there are 14 contributors to the repo [2] one main one (who looks to 
be no longer involved) and 3 other significant ones. There’s no obvious 
connection between them and designmodo (that I could find) other than they 
contributed to this repo. The license was originally CC BY 3.0 but changed to 
MIT in 2013 early in the projects history. [3] Their web site does claim 
copyright [4] but copyright is not stated on the github repo (even under the 
copyright and license section) [5]. So while it may be reasonable to assume 
designmodo are the copyright owners it's certainly possible that the other 
contributors have claims as well and it may be that all copyright holders did 
not give permission for their code to be relicensed.

Thanks,
Justin

1. 
https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/www-legal-discuss/201609.mbox/%3cd4077465.75c8d%25aha...@adobe.com%3e
2. https://github.com/designmodo/Flat-UI/graphs/contributors
3. https://github.com/designmodo/Flat-UI/issues/18
4. http://designmodo.com/flat-free/
5. https://github.com/designmodo/Flat-UI

Re: AW: [FalconJX][FlexJS] COMPJSC and Build order

[Josh Tynjala]

That would be ideal!

- Josh

On Oct 1, 2016 10:47 PM, "Alex Harui"  wrote:

> One more thought on this:  now that COMPJSC can more or less build its own
> output instead of relying on COMPC to package its pile of .js files, it
> might be worth experimenting with combining Falcon and FalconJX so COMPC
> can produce a SWC or a SWC with JS files based on some configuration
> parameter.  Then there would only be one compiler that produces SWFs or JS
> based on some -output-type flag.
>
> Thoughts?
> -Alex
>
> On 10/1/16, 10:18 PM, "Alex Harui"  wrote:
>
> >Hi Chris,
> >
> >When I read this, I realized I already pushed the changes when I pushed
> >some other changes yesterday.  If the Maven build didn't blow up, it is
> >probably because it is using its own compile-xx-config.xml files so is
> >still generating a pile of .js files and packaging them up on the SWF
> >COMPC run.
> >
> >-Alex
> >
> >On 10/1/16, 6:10 AM, "Christofer Dutz"  wrote:
> >
> >>Hi Alex,
> >>
> >>
> >>so I guess ideally this change should be done on a feature branch, so I
> >>can sort out the Maven issues and we'll merge that back as soon as all is
> >>working. I would like to ask you to create a "feature-autobuild/"-branch
> >>for that. Just give me a short note what branch the stuff is in and I'll
> >>try to sort out the Maven issues.
> >>
> >>
> >>Chris
> >
>
>

Re: AW: [DISCUSS] Switch the site repo to GIT?

[Josh Tynjala]

It is also possible to use ``` for a code block in markdown. No indentation
required. You can also specify the language.

``` actionscript
code
```

- Josh

On Oct 2, 2016 2:54 AM, "Christofer Dutz"  wrote:

> Well they couldn't give me much info on what others are using, but I dug a
> little myself.
>
> So it seems that they use Jekyl to convert Markdown into HTML. There
> however is a plugin to use Asciidoctor to do the same.
>
>
> Having used both Asciidoctor and Markdown, I think Asciidoctor is far more
> superior when it comes to features. Especially when it comes to the syntax,
> I don't quite like how easy it is to mess up a Markdown file.
>
>
> Just as an example: If you want to output some code, in MD you have to
> prefix every line of code with four spaces, in adoc you put it in between
> two "-" blocks.
>
> Lists in MD require you to separate each line with two spaces:
>
> * first level
>
> * first level
>
>   * second level
>
>
> In adoc this is:
>
> * first level
>
> * first level
>
> ** second level
>
>
> Markdown does a lot with spaces and Asciidoc does the same with
> duplicating the important chars. Duplicating important chars doesn't get
> messed up by the line indenting of IDEs.
>
>
> So how about me investigating how to produce gitpages with asciidoc and
> having these replace the ApacheCMS pages?
>
>
> Do we have any special stuff in the CMS or is all just static?
>
>
> Chris
>
> 
> Von: Alex Harui 
> Gesendet: Sonntag, 2. Oktober 2016 07:14:42
> An: dev@flex.apache.org
> Betreff: Re: [DISCUSS] Switch the site repo to GIT?
>
> It is time to consider getting off of Apache CMS.  I think some projects
> have done so already.  I'd like to know more about what we lose/gain if we
> go way from Apache CMS.
>
> Some projects are experimenting with GitHub Pages.  I think it should be
> considered as well.
>
> -Alex
>
> On 10/1/16, 9:11 AM, "carlos.rov...@gmail.com on behalf of Carlos Rovira"
> 
> wrote:
>
> >Orher projects using git for the cms what are using?
> >Could we switch, for example, to a wordpress cms if we want?
> >
> >
> >
> >El sábado, 1 de octubre de 2016, Christofer Dutz
> >
> >escribió:
> >
> >> Ok so it turns out that as long as we use the Apache CMS we can't change
> >> to GIT. Guess this was the reason for still being on GIT.
> >>
> >>
> >> I have no idea what we really need the CMS for, but as long as we need
> >> this, we seem to be stuck there :-(
> >>
> >>
> >> Chris
> >>
> >> 
> >> Von: Alex Harui >
> >> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 29. September 2016 18:56:39
> >> An: dev@flex.apache.org 
> >> Betreff: Re: [DISCUSS] Switch the site repo to GIT?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 9/29/16, 1:43 AM, "Christofer Dutz"  >> > wrote:
> >>
> >> >Hi guys,
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >as you might know I have been working hard on the site-generation and
> >> >this finally seems to be working nicely. The only problem I have is
> >>that
> >> >I can't submit to the site repo from the Build agent as SVN isn't setup
> >> >to allow that. Git however is able to commit without hard-coding
> >> >credentials. Infra suggested to move our site to GIT to resolve this
> >> >issue.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >I was wondering anyway why this is our only SVN repo. Wouldn't it be
> >>cool
> >> >to have everything in one type of repo?
> >>
> >> The fact our web site is on SVN isn't a big deal to me, but what is a
> >>big
> >> deal is 99% of the time I find the two-step staging/publish workflow
> >> really painful.  Related, there is currently no way for the MD5 checker
> >>on
> >> the CI server to update the website automatically.  If moving to Git
> >>gets
> >> us out of that, I'd be for it.  Can you provide more info on how folks
> >>do
> >> staging when working on big overhauls and why Git doesn't have this
> >> credential issue?
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> -Alex
> >>
> >>
> >
> >--
> >
> >Carlos Rovira
> >Director General
> >M: +34 607 22 60 05
> >http://www.codeoscopic.com
> >http://www.avant2.es
> >
> >
> >Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario y puede contener
> >información privilegiada o confidencial. Si ha recibido este mensaje por
> >error, le rogamos que nos lo comunique inmediatamente por esta misma vía y
> >proceda a su destrucción.
> >
> >De la vigente Ley Orgánica de Protección de Datos (15/1999), le
> >comunicamos
> >que sus datos forman parte de un fichero cuyo responsable es CODEOSCOPIC
> >S.A. La finalidad de dicho tratamiento es facilitar la prestación del
> >servicio o información solicitados, teniendo usted derecho de acceso,
> >rectificación, cancelación y oposición de sus datos dirigiéndose a
> >nuestras
> >oficinas c/ Paseo de la Habana 9-11, 28036, Madrid con la documentación
> >necesaria.
>
>

AW: AW: [DISCUSS] Switch the site repo to GIT?

[Christofer Dutz]

I missed your last part. jekyl doesn't really do the conversion you can use 
asciidoc in github too ... Just have a look at the three adoc files I have in 
the compiler repo.

It's just a plugin to jekyl, the same way markdown ist too.

Chris



Von meinem Samsung Galaxy Smartphone gesendet.


 Ursprüngliche Nachricht 
Von: Alex Harui 
Datum: 02.10.16 16:19 (GMT+01:00)
An: dev@flex.apache.org
Betreff: Re: AW: [DISCUSS] Switch the site repo to GIT?

Thanks for looking into this.

That sounds like a lot of steps.  In the little reading I did of GH pages,
it appeared that we could create an 'orphan' branch with a specific name
in any of our existing repos and simply pushing files to the branch would
kick off an update of the site.

I would think gitpubsub at the ASF is also that simple, so I don't quite
get why Maven has to be involved.  Seems like we would/could:

1) get a new Git repo to replace our SVN site repo.
2) set it up for gitpubsub as flex.a.o
3) create asf-site branches in all of our other repos
4) modify our site to point to the pages coming out of the other repos.

Seems like that would be less copying of stuff, and co-locates
repo-specific doc with each repo.  But I could have missed something
important in my quick tour of what is out there.

One more question: are other Apache projects using asciidoc?  Are there
any concerns about having doc generated by a GPL tool like Asciidoc?
Jekyll is  MIT.

Thanks,
-Alex

On 10/2/16, 3:44 AM, "Christofer Dutz"  wrote:

>Ok so I did a little searching:
>
>
>It seems that in general if you setup a git repo and define an "asf-site"
>branch in that (of course have Infra register the repo in their system),
>stuff pushed to that branch is automatically published as website.
>
>
>I just tested it, the maven site plugin is able to produce html from:
>
>- APT (don't know that)
>
>- XDoc (don't know that)
>
>- Markdown
>
>- FML (don't know that)
>
>- Asciidoctor (After adding the plugin)
>
>
>So we could write our content in any of these formats.
>
>I found this very helpful page of a fellow Apache project [1].
>
>
>They said, that Markdown had the advantage of allowing inline HTML. So I
>understand that this could be ideal for the parts of the site where we
>need detailed control over the HTML.
>
>
>Asciidoctor has the advantage of allowing more features (inline graphs
>and diagrams just to state one thing I really like). So this could be
>ideal for the parts where we need features over control of the HTML.
>
>
>So why not simply allow to use both?
>
>
>I have done some searching and I'd like to propose something:
>
>
>1. We create a new git repo for the site
>
>2. I setup a maven site project inside that
>
>3. I configure the build to allow multiple types of content
>
>- Markdown (same as github pages)
>
>- Asciidoctor
>
>4. I configure the build to deploy the site to the "asf-site" branch of
>the same repo
>
>5. We have infra setup the gitpubsub system to stage that somewhere so we
>can test it
>
>6. We do the Content migration, CSS, HTML fine tuning till we're happy
>with it
>
>7. We make the new site the official site.
>
>
>Would that be an option?
>
>
>Chris
>
>
>[1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/TRAFODION/Modify+Web+Site
>
>
>
>
>Von: Alex Harui 
>Gesendet: Sonntag, 2. Oktober 2016 07:14:42
>An: dev@flex.apache.org
>Betreff: Re: [DISCUSS] Switch the site repo to GIT?
>
>It is time to consider getting off of Apache CMS.  I think some projects
>have done so already.  I'd like to know more about what we lose/gain if we
>go way from Apache CMS.
>
>Some projects are experimenting with GitHub Pages.  I think it should be
>considered as well.
>
>-Alex
>
>On 10/1/16, 9:11 AM, "carlos.rov...@gmail.com on behalf of Carlos Rovira"
>
>wrote:
>
>>Orher projects using git for the cms what are using?
>>Could we switch, for example, to a wordpress cms if we want?
>>
>>
>>
>>El sábado, 1 de octubre de 2016, Christofer Dutz
>>
>>escribió:
>>
>>> Ok so it turns out that as long as we use the Apache CMS we can't
>>>change
>>> to GIT. Guess this was the reason for still being on GIT.
>>>
>>>
>>> I have no idea what we really need the CMS for, but as long as we need
>>> this, we seem to be stuck there :-(
>>>
>>>
>>> Chris
>>>
>>> 
>>> Von: Alex Harui >
>>> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 29. September 2016 18:56:39
>>> An: dev@flex.apache.org 
>>> Betreff: Re: [DISCUSS] Switch the site repo to GIT?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 9/29/16, 1:43 AM, "Christofer Dutz" >> > wrote:
>>>
>>> >Hi guys,
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >as you might know I have been working hard on the site-generation and
>>> >this finally seems to be working nicely. The only problem I have 

AW: AW: [DISCUSS] Switch the site repo to GIT?

[Christofer Dutz]

Hi Alex,


Well no software on the world renders Markdown as HTML in the browser. There is 
always a conversion involved. The solution with the orphan branch in Github 
simply triggers their conversion tool they have built into their system. But 
which has to be taken as it is and the projects have no way of influencing.


That approach would work if we want to have our website called 
"apache-flex.github.org", but we don't want that, do we?


We currently can't publish to the website from Jenkins as Jenkins currently 
doesn't have the ability to push to Git from a job. BuildBot is the only tool 
that is allowed to do that (Don't know why, but it simply is that way). When 
using BuildBot from Apache we can publish to flex.apache.org using gitpubsub. 
You still have to implement the document conversion somehow. Some projects 
manually create perl scripts for this which they have to create and maintain. 
Or you simply use the mechanism that maven comes with out of the box. And the 
way I configured it, we could use all of the formats in my last post to publish 
content.


The double up-side of this would also be, that it integrates perfectly with the 
site generation of the other parts.


In general, the steps I proposed are exactly the ones you did, but I split up 
"1) get a new Git repo to replace our SVN site repo." into steps 1-4" which 
could be done by copying the pom from the flexjs-compiler module to the new 
repo ant tweaking it a little. The thing is that your plan is missing the 
conversion step.


Chris


Von: Alex Harui 
Gesendet: Sonntag, 2. Oktober 2016 16:18:52
An: dev@flex.apache.org
Betreff: Re: AW: [DISCUSS] Switch the site repo to GIT?

Thanks for looking into this.

That sounds like a lot of steps.  In the little reading I did of GH pages,
it appeared that we could create an 'orphan' branch with a specific name
in any of our existing repos and simply pushing files to the branch would
kick off an update of the site.

I would think gitpubsub at the ASF is also that simple, so I don't quite
get why Maven has to be involved.  Seems like we would/could:

1) get a new Git repo to replace our SVN site repo.
2) set it up for gitpubsub as flex.a.o
3) create asf-site branches in all of our other repos
4) modify our site to point to the pages coming out of the other repos.

Seems like that would be less copying of stuff, and co-locates
repo-specific doc with each repo.  But I could have missed something
important in my quick tour of what is out there.

One more question: are other Apache projects using asciidoc?  Are there
any concerns about having doc generated by a GPL tool like Asciidoc?
Jekyll is  MIT.

Thanks,
-Alex

On 10/2/16, 3:44 AM, "Christofer Dutz"  wrote:

>Ok so I did a little searching:
>
>
>It seems that in general if you setup a git repo and define an "asf-site"
>branch in that (of course have Infra register the repo in their system),
>stuff pushed to that branch is automatically published as website.
>
>
>I just tested it, the maven site plugin is able to produce html from:
>
>- APT (don't know that)
>
>- XDoc (don't know that)
>
>- Markdown
>
>- FML (don't know that)
>
>- Asciidoctor (After adding the plugin)
>
>
>So we could write our content in any of these formats.
>
>I found this very helpful page of a fellow Apache project [1].
>
>
>They said, that Markdown had the advantage of allowing inline HTML. So I
>understand that this could be ideal for the parts of the site where we
>need detailed control over the HTML.
>
>
>Asciidoctor has the advantage of allowing more features (inline graphs
>and diagrams just to state one thing I really like). So this could be
>ideal for the parts where we need features over control of the HTML.
>
>
>So why not simply allow to use both?
>
>
>I have done some searching and I'd like to propose something:
>
>
>1. We create a new git repo for the site
>
>2. I setup a maven site project inside that
>
>3. I configure the build to allow multiple types of content
>
>- Markdown (same as github pages)
>
>- Asciidoctor
>
>4. I configure the build to deploy the site to the "asf-site" branch of
>the same repo
>
>5. We have infra setup the gitpubsub system to stage that somewhere so we
>can test it
>
>6. We do the Content migration, CSS, HTML fine tuning till we're happy
>with it
>
>7. We make the new site the official site.
>
>
>Would that be an option?
>
>
>Chris
>
>
>[1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/TRAFODION/Modify+Web+Site
>
>
>
>
>Von: Alex Harui 
>Gesendet: Sonntag, 2. Oktober 2016 07:14:42
>An: dev@flex.apache.org
>Betreff: Re: [DISCUSS] Switch the site repo to GIT?
>
>It is time to consider getting off of Apache CMS.  I think some projects
>have done so already.  I'd like to know more about what we lose/gain if we
>go way from Apache CMS.
>
>Some projects are experimenting with GitHub Pages.  I 

Re: AW: [DISCUSS] Switch the site repo to GIT?

[Alex Harui]

Thanks for looking into this.

That sounds like a lot of steps.  In the little reading I did of GH pages,
it appeared that we could create an 'orphan' branch with a specific name
in any of our existing repos and simply pushing files to the branch would
kick off an update of the site.

I would think gitpubsub at the ASF is also that simple, so I don't quite
get why Maven has to be involved.  Seems like we would/could:

1) get a new Git repo to replace our SVN site repo.
2) set it up for gitpubsub as flex.a.o
3) create asf-site branches in all of our other repos
4) modify our site to point to the pages coming out of the other repos.

Seems like that would be less copying of stuff, and co-locates
repo-specific doc with each repo.  But I could have missed something
important in my quick tour of what is out there.

One more question: are other Apache projects using asciidoc?  Are there
any concerns about having doc generated by a GPL tool like Asciidoc?
Jekyll is  MIT.

Thanks,
-Alex

On 10/2/16, 3:44 AM, "Christofer Dutz"  wrote:

>Ok so I did a little searching:
>
>
>It seems that in general if you setup a git repo and define an "asf-site"
>branch in that (of course have Infra register the repo in their system),
>stuff pushed to that branch is automatically published as website.
>
>
>I just tested it, the maven site plugin is able to produce html from:
>
>- APT (don't know that)
>
>- XDoc (don't know that)
>
>- Markdown
>
>- FML (don't know that)
>
>- Asciidoctor (After adding the plugin)
>
>
>So we could write our content in any of these formats.
>
>I found this very helpful page of a fellow Apache project [1].
>
>
>They said, that Markdown had the advantage of allowing inline HTML. So I
>understand that this could be ideal for the parts of the site where we
>need detailed control over the HTML.
>
>
>Asciidoctor has the advantage of allowing more features (inline graphs
>and diagrams just to state one thing I really like). So this could be
>ideal for the parts where we need features over control of the HTML.
>
>
>So why not simply allow to use both?
>
>
>I have done some searching and I'd like to propose something:
>
>
>1. We create a new git repo for the site
>
>2. I setup a maven site project inside that
>
>3. I configure the build to allow multiple types of content
>
>- Markdown (same as github pages)
>
>- Asciidoctor
>
>4. I configure the build to deploy the site to the "asf-site" branch of
>the same repo
>
>5. We have infra setup the gitpubsub system to stage that somewhere so we
>can test it
>
>6. We do the Content migration, CSS, HTML fine tuning till we're happy
>with it
>
>7. We make the new site the official site.
>
>
>Would that be an option?
>
>
>Chris
>
>
>[1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/TRAFODION/Modify+Web+Site
>
>
>
>
>Von: Alex Harui 
>Gesendet: Sonntag, 2. Oktober 2016 07:14:42
>An: dev@flex.apache.org
>Betreff: Re: [DISCUSS] Switch the site repo to GIT?
>
>It is time to consider getting off of Apache CMS.  I think some projects
>have done so already.  I'd like to know more about what we lose/gain if we
>go way from Apache CMS.
>
>Some projects are experimenting with GitHub Pages.  I think it should be
>considered as well.
>
>-Alex
>
>On 10/1/16, 9:11 AM, "carlos.rov...@gmail.com on behalf of Carlos Rovira"
>
>wrote:
>
>>Orher projects using git for the cms what are using?
>>Could we switch, for example, to a wordpress cms if we want?
>>
>>
>>
>>El sábado, 1 de octubre de 2016, Christofer Dutz
>>
>>escribió:
>>
>>> Ok so it turns out that as long as we use the Apache CMS we can't
>>>change
>>> to GIT. Guess this was the reason for still being on GIT.
>>>
>>>
>>> I have no idea what we really need the CMS for, but as long as we need
>>> this, we seem to be stuck there :-(
>>>
>>>
>>> Chris
>>>
>>> 
>>> Von: Alex Harui >
>>> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 29. September 2016 18:56:39
>>> An: dev@flex.apache.org 
>>> Betreff: Re: [DISCUSS] Switch the site repo to GIT?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 9/29/16, 1:43 AM, "Christofer Dutz" >> > wrote:
>>>
>>> >Hi guys,
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >as you might know I have been working hard on the site-generation and
>>> >this finally seems to be working nicely. The only problem I have is
>>>that
>>> >I can't submit to the site repo from the Build agent as SVN isn't
>>>setup
>>> >to allow that. Git however is able to commit without hard-coding
>>> >credentials. Infra suggested to move our site to GIT to resolve this
>>> >issue.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >I was wondering anyway why this is our only SVN repo. Wouldn't it be
>>>cool
>>> >to have everything in one type of repo?
>>>
>>> The fact our web site is on SVN isn't a big deal to me, but what is a
>>>big
>>> deal is 99% 

AW: [DISCUSS] Switch the site repo to GIT?

[Christofer Dutz]

Ok so I did a little searching:


It seems that in general if you setup a git repo and define an "asf-site" 
branch in that (of course have Infra register the repo in their system), stuff 
pushed to that branch is automatically published as website.


I just tested it, the maven site plugin is able to produce html from:

- APT (don't know that)

- XDoc (don't know that)

- Markdown

- FML (don't know that)

- Asciidoctor (After adding the plugin)


So we could write our content in any of these formats.

I found this very helpful page of a fellow Apache project [1].


They said, that Markdown had the advantage of allowing inline HTML. So I 
understand that this could be ideal for the parts of the site where we need 
detailed control over the HTML.


Asciidoctor has the advantage of allowing more features (inline graphs and 
diagrams just to state one thing I really like). So this could be ideal for the 
parts where we need features over control of the HTML.


So why not simply allow to use both?


I have done some searching and I'd like to propose something:


1. We create a new git repo for the site

2. I setup a maven site project inside that

3. I configure the build to allow multiple types of content

- Markdown (same as github pages)

- Asciidoctor

4. I configure the build to deploy the site to the "asf-site" branch of the 
same repo

5. We have infra setup the gitpubsub system to stage that somewhere so we can 
test it

6. We do the Content migration, CSS, HTML fine tuning till we're happy with it

7. We make the new site the official site.


Would that be an option?


Chris


[1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/TRAFODION/Modify+Web+Site




Von: Alex Harui 
Gesendet: Sonntag, 2. Oktober 2016 07:14:42
An: dev@flex.apache.org
Betreff: Re: [DISCUSS] Switch the site repo to GIT?

It is time to consider getting off of Apache CMS.  I think some projects
have done so already.  I'd like to know more about what we lose/gain if we
go way from Apache CMS.

Some projects are experimenting with GitHub Pages.  I think it should be
considered as well.

-Alex

On 10/1/16, 9:11 AM, "carlos.rov...@gmail.com on behalf of Carlos Rovira"
 wrote:

>Orher projects using git for the cms what are using?
>Could we switch, for example, to a wordpress cms if we want?
>
>
>
>El sábado, 1 de octubre de 2016, Christofer Dutz
>
>escribió:
>
>> Ok so it turns out that as long as we use the Apache CMS we can't change
>> to GIT. Guess this was the reason for still being on GIT.
>>
>>
>> I have no idea what we really need the CMS for, but as long as we need
>> this, we seem to be stuck there :-(
>>
>>
>> Chris
>>
>> 
>> Von: Alex Harui >
>> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 29. September 2016 18:56:39
>> An: dev@flex.apache.org 
>> Betreff: Re: [DISCUSS] Switch the site repo to GIT?
>>
>>
>>
>> On 9/29/16, 1:43 AM, "Christofer Dutz" > > wrote:
>>
>> >Hi guys,
>> >
>> >
>> >as you might know I have been working hard on the site-generation and
>> >this finally seems to be working nicely. The only problem I have is
>>that
>> >I can't submit to the site repo from the Build agent as SVN isn't setup
>> >to allow that. Git however is able to commit without hard-coding
>> >credentials. Infra suggested to move our site to GIT to resolve this
>> >issue.
>> >
>> >
>> >I was wondering anyway why this is our only SVN repo. Wouldn't it be
>>cool
>> >to have everything in one type of repo?
>>
>> The fact our web site is on SVN isn't a big deal to me, but what is a
>>big
>> deal is 99% of the time I find the two-step staging/publish workflow
>> really painful.  Related, there is currently no way for the MD5 checker
>>on
>> the CI server to update the website automatically.  If moving to Git
>>gets
>> us out of that, I'd be for it.  Can you provide more info on how folks
>>do
>> staging when working on big overhauls and why Git doesn't have this
>> credential issue?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> -Alex
>>
>>
>
>--
>
>Carlos Rovira
>Director General
>M: +34 607 22 60 05
>http://www.codeoscopic.com
>http://www.avant2.es
>
>
>Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario y puede contener
>información privilegiada o confidencial. Si ha recibido este mensaje por
>error, le rogamos que nos lo comunique inmediatamente por esta misma vía y
>proceda a su destrucción.
>
>De la vigente Ley Orgánica de Protección de Datos (15/1999), le
>comunicamos
>que sus datos forman parte de un fichero cuyo responsable es CODEOSCOPIC
>S.A. La finalidad de dicho tratamiento es facilitar la prestación del
>servicio o información solicitados, teniendo usted derecho de acceso,
>rectificación, cancelación y oposición de sus datos dirigiéndose a
>nuestras
>oficinas c/ Paseo de la Habana 9-11, 28036, Madrid 

AW: [DISCUSS] Switch the site repo to GIT?

[Christofer Dutz]

Well they couldn't give me much info on what others are using, but I dug a 
little myself.

So it seems that they use Jekyl to convert Markdown into HTML. There however is 
a plugin to use Asciidoctor to do the same.


Having used both Asciidoctor and Markdown, I think Asciidoctor is far more 
superior when it comes to features. Especially when it comes to the syntax, I 
don't quite like how easy it is to mess up a Markdown file.


Just as an example: If you want to output some code, in MD you have to prefix 
every line of code with four spaces, in adoc you put it in between two "-" 
blocks.

Lists in MD require you to separate each line with two spaces:

* first level

* first level

  * second level


In adoc this is:

* first level

* first level

** second level


Markdown does a lot with spaces and Asciidoc does the same with duplicating the 
important chars. Duplicating important chars doesn't get messed up by the line 
indenting of IDEs.


So how about me investigating how to produce gitpages with asciidoc and having 
these replace the ApacheCMS pages?


Do we have any special stuff in the CMS or is all just static?


Chris


Von: Alex Harui 
Gesendet: Sonntag, 2. Oktober 2016 07:14:42
An: dev@flex.apache.org
Betreff: Re: [DISCUSS] Switch the site repo to GIT?

It is time to consider getting off of Apache CMS.  I think some projects
have done so already.  I'd like to know more about what we lose/gain if we
go way from Apache CMS.

Some projects are experimenting with GitHub Pages.  I think it should be
considered as well.

-Alex

On 10/1/16, 9:11 AM, "carlos.rov...@gmail.com on behalf of Carlos Rovira"
 wrote:

>Orher projects using git for the cms what are using?
>Could we switch, for example, to a wordpress cms if we want?
>
>
>
>El sábado, 1 de octubre de 2016, Christofer Dutz
>
>escribió:
>
>> Ok so it turns out that as long as we use the Apache CMS we can't change
>> to GIT. Guess this was the reason for still being on GIT.
>>
>>
>> I have no idea what we really need the CMS for, but as long as we need
>> this, we seem to be stuck there :-(
>>
>>
>> Chris
>>
>> 
>> Von: Alex Harui >
>> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 29. September 2016 18:56:39
>> An: dev@flex.apache.org 
>> Betreff: Re: [DISCUSS] Switch the site repo to GIT?
>>
>>
>>
>> On 9/29/16, 1:43 AM, "Christofer Dutz" > > wrote:
>>
>> >Hi guys,
>> >
>> >
>> >as you might know I have been working hard on the site-generation and
>> >this finally seems to be working nicely. The only problem I have is
>>that
>> >I can't submit to the site repo from the Build agent as SVN isn't setup
>> >to allow that. Git however is able to commit without hard-coding
>> >credentials. Infra suggested to move our site to GIT to resolve this
>> >issue.
>> >
>> >
>> >I was wondering anyway why this is our only SVN repo. Wouldn't it be
>>cool
>> >to have everything in one type of repo?
>>
>> The fact our web site is on SVN isn't a big deal to me, but what is a
>>big
>> deal is 99% of the time I find the two-step staging/publish workflow
>> really painful.  Related, there is currently no way for the MD5 checker
>>on
>> the CI server to update the website automatically.  If moving to Git
>>gets
>> us out of that, I'd be for it.  Can you provide more info on how folks
>>do
>> staging when working on big overhauls and why Git doesn't have this
>> credential issue?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> -Alex
>>
>>
>
>--
>
>Carlos Rovira
>Director General
>M: +34 607 22 60 05
>http://www.codeoscopic.com
>http://www.avant2.es
>
>
>Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario y puede contener
>información privilegiada o confidencial. Si ha recibido este mensaje por
>error, le rogamos que nos lo comunique inmediatamente por esta misma vía y
>proceda a su destrucción.
>
>De la vigente Ley Orgánica de Protección de Datos (15/1999), le
>comunicamos
>que sus datos forman parte de un fichero cuyo responsable es CODEOSCOPIC
>S.A. La finalidad de dicho tratamiento es facilitar la prestación del
>servicio o información solicitados, teniendo usted derecho de acceso,
>rectificación, cancelación y oposición de sus datos dirigiéndose a
>nuestras
>oficinas c/ Paseo de la Habana 9-11, 28036, Madrid con la documentación
>necesaria.