I was thinking the directory structure is the same as at Apache, so a separate directory for each version of the site.
http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-antrun-plugin/ http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-antrun-plugin-1.5/ http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-antrun-plugin-1.6/ The current version is the directory with no version, and that would just be a file system symbolic link to the directory of the current release. maven-antrun-plugin -> maven-antrun-plugin-1.6 I think Apache would handle this without any problems, but I haven't tested it. When the next release is staged, the site is deployed to maven-antrun-plugin-1.7 Assuming that the release went fine, you just update the link to the new directory. maven-antrun-plugin -> maven-antrun-plugin-1.7 On 05/24/2011 11:53 PM, Anders Hammar wrote: > I see lots of benefits of deploying each version of the site to a > different location. However, when you say symlink, do do you mean file > system symbolic link? Wouldn't that mean that we need to keep the > versioned site deployment in different folder tree than the latest one? > That could make some other web server configuration more cumbersome > (need to add aliases possibly). > > I think it would great if > http://mojo.codehaus.org/awesome-maven-plugin/ > would take me to the latest (official) site of this plugin. If I want to > view a specific version of the site, I'd just add the version (or > similar) number: > http://mojo.codehaus.org/buildnumber-maven-plugin/1.0/ > > An automatic solution would be good, but I don't see a problem with > having a manual step. Hey, there are lots of manual steps in the release > process already. > > /Anders > > On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 04:44, Paul Gier <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > On 05/21/2011 07:30 PM, Markus Mahlberg wrote: > > For what it's worth, I agree with you about versioned docs, but > we surely have to talk about the technical details. > > > > You are assuming that .htaccess files are taken into consideration > by the webserver, which isn't neccessarily so. > > Most of the httpds out there don't, the Apache httpd being the > only one as far as I know. > > And even the Apache httpd does not necessarily obey the directives > of the .htaccess files. As a result, relying on the .htaccess files > would > > "condemn" every mirror (if existing) and mojo.codehaus.org > <http://mojo.codehaus.org> to use the Apache httpd from now on, not > to mention a certain configuration of the apache which had to be > obeyed (and documented, tested, maintained, *mumble* ...) > > > > That beeing said, we could think of creating a site with multiple > versions of itself in case according tags are present in the used > SCM system. > > But to be honest with you, I have a strong feeling that this would > easily lead to configuration monsters. > > > > Propably the easiest way to achieve what you want is to simply add > a version number to every "release site" directory and link them > manually. > > > > I like the idea of adding a version number to each site deployment, and > then just creating a symlink to point to the current release. That > would allow for easy staging, and when the release is finished, just > update the link. Anyone else open to this idea? > > > > Another idea would be to have a directory structure like > > > > foo-plugin-site/ > > |-- 1.0 > > |-- 1.1 > > |-- 1.2 > > `-- 1.3 > > > > on the server and have the site-plugin write an index.html > according to the existing directories, probably with the help of a > meta file in 'foo-plugin-site'. > > But even the concept would have a major impact on the whole > community (since it has an impact on a well introduced behavior) and > therefor has to be _carefully_ planned and discussed. > > > > > > Kind regards, > > > > Markus > > > > Am 22.05.2011 um 01:38 schrieb Benson Margulies: > > > >> Something tells me that you've all considered and rejected this > before, but ... > >> > >> What if the site deployment URL was set to include a version number > >> element, and then part of the release process was to update a > >> .htaccess to point to the latest release? > >> > >> Then you could deploy a snapshot site, and people who really > wanted to > >> could look at old release sites, and a new release wouldn't > occupy the > >> main URL until after the vote passed. > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe from this list, please visit: > >> > >> http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email > >> > >> > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from this list, please visit: > > > > http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from this list, please visit: > > http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from this list, please visit: http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
