OK, I made sure /www/mahout.apache.org is from SVN:

$ svn info
Path: .
URL: http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/mahout/site/new_website

So, to update the site, you update new_website in SVN. I think we're
done with this step at least.

On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 12:46 PM, Grant Ingersoll <gsing...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> On Feb 9, 2012, at 4:55 AM, Dan Brickley wrote:
>
>> On 9 February 2012 13:34, Grant Ingersoll <gsing...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> I just migrated Lucene (I think y'all will find the look and feel quite 
>>> familiar) over to the new CMS, so I can help if needed.  It is quite nice 
>>> and easy to use.  For us, it should be trivial for the main page.  The 
>>> Confluence stuff we really need to fix.
>>
>> It sounds like the 'Nov 2011' switchoff deadline (for
>> confluence-driven sites) reported in
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MAHOUT-804 has stretched to 'end
>> of 2012'.
>>
>> I made a new Confluence page last week and it seems to have
>> auto-exported OK -
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/MAHOUT/rowsimilarityjob.html - and therefore
>> shows up in search engines etc. Having tried the CMS, ... how much of
>> the Wiki do you think could live there? Is CMS still going to be
>> committer-only, or is any broader participation possible now?
>
> We're having this exact discussion over in Lucene land.  To me, as Mahout 
> matures, we likely will promote up official docs, so those are good 
> candidates for the CMS.
>
> Unfortunately, CMS is committers only.  However, having said that, there is 
> no reason why we can't make people who work on docs committers with the 
> understanding that it is their primary focus.  Some of the bigger projects 
> explicitly do that.  It's not an enforced thing, as in locking them down to 
> that part of the code only, but more of a recognition of this is the primary 
> place to make contributions for a particular person based on their past 
> experience.
>
>
>> Is
>> migrating from confluence to http://wiki.apache.org/general/ a
>> plausible option?
>
> I don't really like MoinMoin.  I would rather not.
>

Reply via email to