On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 1:33 PM Sergio Fernández <[email protected]> wrote:
> Well, I guess here we are bound to whatever Commons PMC decides to this > respect. > > The introduction of gitpubsub is definitely great news, since many > projects are currently using svn just for their sites. > But I think (I hope) a pure Maven site would be supported in the new > infrastructure, so we could keep what we already have. > That's basically what gitpubsub is supposed to be. The difference is that to publish to the website, we need to push to a repo. We can probably start tinkering with the idea of publishing the website based on pushes to our git repo, but I think the intention is that we could use site-deploy to push to a git repo, and then boom, the site's live. If we think we want to try that route, I can get the ball rolling and request the infra resources required to allow us to push that way. John > > Those are my two cents. > > > On 29/03/15 03:02, John D. Ament wrote: > > So anyone have any questions/comments about the infra discussions around > > retiring CMS? > > > > I'm also curious, what format for the site were you planning to use? > > Storing asciidoc/markdown in git and publishing via maven site? > > > > John > > > > On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 5:58 AM Andy Seaborne <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> And then: > >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/INFRA/CMS+ > >> Decommissioning+RFC+-+Frequently+Asked+Questions > >> > > > > -- > Sergio Fernández > Partner Technology Manager > Redlink GmbH > m: +43 660 2747 925 > e: [email protected] > w: http://redlink.co >
