Splitting the website and documentation

[Wendy Smoak-3]

It looks like this work was already started, and the versioned docs
are under documentation/1_1.

I'm planning to move that versioned documentation (the usage and admin
guides, etc.) to a separate module.

--
Wendy

[brettporter]

Sounds good! Is this a separate module under continuum trunk  
(something like continuum-docs), or a separate trunk?

I'm assuming you are doing something similar to the archiva site.

Cheers,
Brett

On 29/12/2007, at 12:06 PM, Wendy Smoak wrote:

> It looks like this work was already started, and the versioned docs
> are under documentation/1_1.
>
> I'm planning to move that versioned documentation (the usage and admin
> guides, etc.) to a separate module.
>
> --
> Wendy

[Wendy Smoak-3]

On Dec 28, 2007 7:18 PM, Brett Porter <brett@...> wrote:

> Sounds good! Is this a separate module under continuum trunk
> (something like continuum-docs), or a separate trunk?
>
> I'm assuming you are doing something similar to the archiva site.

I was just going to leave it under continuum/trunk as continuum-docs
and continuum-site.

Someone already rearranged Archiva-- the maven/current svn:externals
definition now has archiva, archiva-site, archiva-parent and
archiva-tools.

--
Wendy

[brettporter]

On 29/12/2007, at 1:35 PM, Wendy Smoak wrote:

> On Dec 28, 2007 7:18 PM, Brett Porter <brett@...> wrote:
>
>> Sounds good! Is this a separate module under continuum trunk
>> (something like continuum-docs), or a separate trunk?
>>
>> I'm assuming you are doing something similar to the archiva site.
>
> I was just going to leave it under continuum/trunk as continuum-docs
> and continuum-site.

Cool, thanks for that. Should be pretty straightforward to move the  
site up at a later date if needed.

> Someone already rearranged Archiva-- the maven/current svn:externals
> definition now has archiva, archiva-site, archiva-parent and
> archiva-tools.

Yep, that was me :)

Cheers,
Brett

[Wendy Smoak-3]

On Dec 28, 2007 7:51 PM, Brett Porter <brett@...> wrote:
>
> On 29/12/2007, at 1:35 PM, Wendy Smoak wrote:
> > I was just going to leave it under continuum/trunk as continuum-docs
> > and continuum-site.
>
> Cool, thanks for that. Should be pretty straightforward to move the
> site up at a later date if needed.

This is done.  The versioned docs are in continuum-docs, publishing to
/continuum/docs/$version.

I moved the 1.1 docs to http://maven.apache.org/continuum/docs/1.1 and
added a redirect (from /continuum/documentation/1_1) to the .htaccess
file.

This does leave us without a way to edit and re-publish the existing
1.1 docs, since this new module "belongs" to 1.2-SNAPSHOT.

I don't want to branch all of Continuum unless we're doing a 1.1.1
release, but we could branch just the continuum-docs module.
Thoughts?

--
Wendy

[Wendy Smoak-3]

On Dec 29, 2007 8:55 AM, Wendy Smoak <wsmoak@...> wrote:

> I moved the 1.1 docs to http://maven.apache.org/continuum/docs/1.1 and
> added a redirect (from /continuum/documentation/1_1) to the .htaccess
> file.

... and it synced the 1.1 directory, but not the contents that I moved
on the server.  I assume that's because of the timestamps on the
files, so I just touched everything under
/www/maven.a.o/continuum/docs/1.1 on people.a.o.  It should sync again
in an hour or so and we'll see what happens.

--
Wendy

[Olivier Lamy]

2007/12/29, Wendy Smoak <wsmoak@...>:

> On Dec 28, 2007 7:51 PM, Brett Porter <brett@...> wrote:
> >
> > On 29/12/2007, at 1:35 PM, Wendy Smoak wrote:
> > > I was just going to leave it under continuum/trunk as continuum-docs
> > > and continuum-site.
> >
> > Cool, thanks for that. Should be pretty straightforward to move the
> > site up at a later date if needed.
>
> This is done.  The versioned docs are in continuum-docs, publishing to
> /continuum/docs/$version.
>
> I moved the 1.1 docs to http://maven.apache.org/continuum/docs/1.1 and
> added a redirect (from /continuum/documentation/1_1) to the .htaccess
> file.
>
> This does leave us without a way to edit and re-publish the existing
> 1.1 docs, since this new module "belongs" to 1.2-SNAPSHOT.
>
> I don't want to branch all of Continuum unless we're doing a 1.1.1
> release, but we could branch just the continuum-docs module.
> Thoughts?

Why not a 1.1.1 bug fix release?
We can walk on jira issues and move some to 1.1.1
Others ?

>
> --
> Wendy
>

--
Olivier

[brettporter]

On 30/12/2007, at 2:55 AM, Wendy Smoak wrote:

> I don't want to branch all of Continuum unless we're doing a 1.1.1
> release, but we could branch just the continuum-docs module.
> Thoughts?

The view I've started to take is that the documentation is best tied  
to the release at the time. If there's a bug in the docs, it gets  
fixed and included in the next release just like a bug in the code.  
Every efforts needs to be made to make the documentation a complete  
and integral part of a release.

This is also why I split the /site/ module off to it's own trunk - the  
parts that do get sent up more regularly (like news, faqs, front page)  
can be. It also gives the opportunity to put up new guides (and you  
also have the wiki), if necessary.

Cheers,
Brett

[Wendy Smoak-3]

On Fri, Dec 28, 2007 at 7:51 PM, Brett Porter <brett@...> wrote:
>
>  On 29/12/2007, at 1:35 PM, Wendy Smoak wrote:
>  >
>  > I was just going to leave it under continuum/trunk as continuum-docs
>  > and continuum-site.
>
>  Cool, thanks for that. Should be pretty straightforward to move the
>  site up at a later date if needed.

... and the later date is now. :)  I'm going to move
trunk/continuum-site up a level to repos/asf/continuum/site.

I don't think it needs trunk|branches|tags of its own, especially if
we're going to keep continuum's own trunk|branches|tags at the top
level like they are now.  (If we really want to tag the site it can go
in repos/asf/continuum/tags.)

--
Wendy