I was thinking of a tool that could be used for different purposes. So if you 
want to use it as a staging tool, you could call it with some options so that 
only content/properties are dumped into a single xml file. Versions/Locks could 
be ignored in this case.
This single XML-file could be imported on the live machine in a single 
transaction.
The big advantage is that you are independant of the underlying store.
Cheers,
Daniel

"Slide Users Mailing List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb am 25.11.04 
15:41:15:
> 
> I'm not sure, but I think these two ideas might be of slightly different 
> magnitudes. I think the original request was how to migrate the minimal 
> amount of information from a dev/staging instance to the live instance. 
> Therefore one would not need/want to take all version/meta information 
> across. It would be a simple "copy from stage to live" sort of function. 
> I have been thinking about how to implement such a solution as well, but 
> my solution was not going to store the "live" data in a webdav 
> repository, just on a filesystem. (I'm not a fan of storing files in a 
> database, so I use the filesystem store anyway)
> 
> I think Daniel's idea was much broader about a full mirror/migration for 
> ALL Webdav content and information. I definately agree that would be a 
> great tool, but I think it might be overkill for the "stage to live" 
> workflow. I guess that is assuming you are moving items piece by piece 
> as they are approved.
> 
> Tim
> 
> Daniel Florey wrote on 25/11/04 03:03 AM:
> > Yes, please!! This is what I had in mind for a longer time, but never 
> > managed to start working on it:
> > A WebDAV-client-tool that determines the server capabilities by doing some 
> > OPTIONS request and retrieves the content by doing the appropriate 
> > WebDAV-requests afterwards.
> > This would have the big advantage that it works with different WebDAV-based 
> > repositories and works if different Slide instances use different storage 
> > configurations.
> > It might be a bit tricky to retrieve not only the content but also 
> > properties, locks, acl and versioning information, but it finally would be 
> > the most elegant solution. If we find a good XML representation for  
> > content/properties etc. we could use this for data import as well.
> > The xml-format could consist of nested elements representing each resource. 
> > This would enable to "dump" the repository located under a given path and 
> > import it to a different location. Optional flags could be used to ignore 
> > locks/acl/versioning information.
> > Just a dream... or is someone interested in implementing this? As stated 
> > before I had this on my personal roadmap for a while but am very busy at 
> > the moment and can hardly find the time to do it.
> > 
> > Cheers,
> > Daniel
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > "Slide Users Mailing List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb am 
> > 24.11.04 23:04:34:
> > 
> >>It sounds like writing a client tool to migrate content from one Slide
> >>server to another one might be a good option. This should be fairly
> >>simple to write using the Webdav client library. Another option that I
> >>originally had in mind is to simply perform a database dump on the
> >>staging server and upload this to production. Of course, this would
> >>preserve the entire version history, which we most likely won't care
> >>about on our production server, so a separate tool might be more
> >>appropriate.
> >>
> >>-Mirko
> >>
> >>
> >>On Wed, 2004-11-24 at 13:58, Richard Emberson wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>I must preface my remarks by stating that our Slide deployment will use
> >>>a database for storage.
> >>>
> >>>Consider Slide namespaces. From what I've heard and based upon the
> >>>mailing list traffic, multi Slide namespace installations do not
> >>>occur very often. Lets say that such installations work just fine,
> >>>- each namespace could use a different database -
> >>>one would need some external Slide/webdav tool/script to promote
> >>>(copy) directories from dev namespace to test namespace to production
> >>>namespace.
> >>>Since one has to create and use such a promotion tool, its not clear
> >>>that having a single Slide with three namespaces buys one anything
> >>>over having three distinct Slides each with their own DB.
> >>>I am assuming that to promote a directory involves getting it (the
> >>>whole directory hierarchy) into the (client) tool from one Slide
> >>>server and then putting into a second Slide server.
> >>>This is true even if one has the three Slide databases on the same
> >>>database server; one must extract the directory from one db and
> >>>insert it into another.
> >>>
> >>>Our dev Slide server will be version controlled while the test and
> >>>production need only have non-versionable copies.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>Mirko Froehlich wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>Our current staging environment really serves a different purpose. Our
> >>>>test, staging, and production servers correspond to phases in our
> >>>>software development cycle and are strictly separated. We definitely
> >>>>wouldn't want to use the production Slide server for development or test
> >>>>purposes, so those at the minimum would need to be separate servers.
> >>>>However, my example of publishing web content from staging to production
> >>>>uses a different concept of staging than we currently have, so it  may
> >>>>not be an ideal example. I suppose for this scenario the content could
> >>>>very well live in two different folders on the production Slide server,
> >>>>with a simple publishing process that copies or moves content from the
> >>>>staging to the production server. I guess in the end this really depends
> >>>>on the workflows we need. For example, for content updates on the live
> >>>>site this approach would probably work well. But lets say we develop a
> >>>>new major version of the application with significant changes to our web
> >>>>content management framework and corresponding new content in the
> >>>>repository. When this goes live, we would need to publish the content
> >>>>from the staging Slide server to the production server.
> >>>>
> >>>>I know this is somewhat hypothetical at this point. I'm just trying to
> >>>>get a feel for how people use Slide. Yours is definitely a viable
> >>>>option.
> >>>>
> >>>>-Mirko
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>On Wed, 2004-11-24 at 12:58, Richard Emberson wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>For my information, why would you not have top-level directories:
> >>>>>dev, staging, and production; all within the same Slide server?
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Richard
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Mirko Froehlich wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>Those of you who are using Slide in a production environment, what kind
> >>>>>>of publishing workflow have you put in place?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>We will likely end up using Slide for various aspects of our
> >>>>>>application. Initially, it will mostly serve as a repository for
> >>>>>>user-specific application data. In this scenario, the user data would
> >>>>>>only live on the production server and there would not have to be a
> >>>>>>publishing process that moves data from staging to production. However,
> >>>>>>there's a good chance that we may end up using Slide for web publishing
> >>>>>>as well, in which case we would probably want to be able to manage
> >>>>>>content on the staging server and push it to production as part of a
> >>>>>>publishing workflow.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>I suppose this could be as simple as performing a database dump on
> >>>>>>staging and loading it on production. We would probably set up multiple
> >>>>>>db stores, which would allow us to publish the part of the repository
> >>>>>>that is used for web publishing, but not the part of the repository that
> >>>>>>contains the users' application data.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>Anyway, I would be interested in hearing about your experiences and best
> >>>>>>practices that you have determined for these kinds of scenarios.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>-Mirko
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> > 
> > 
> > ________________________________________________________________
> > Verschicken Sie romantische, coole und witzige Bilder per SMS!
> > Jetzt neu bei WEB.DE FreeMail: http://freemail.web.de/?mc=021193
> > 
> > 
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 


__________________________________________________________
Mit WEB.DE FreePhone mit hoechster Qualitaet ab 0 Ct./Min.
weltweit telefonieren! http://freephone.web.de/?mc=021201


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to