If Ben turns on rewrite rules in .htaccess, we can push a .htaccess
with an antrun as part of the release profile.

On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 3:48 AM, Markus Mahlberg
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Thw hole point is that relying on symlinks is simply not a portable way to do 
> it.
> Neither do all operating systems support symbolic links nor does even the 
> Apache httpd necessarily follow them.
>
> And the idea should be to solve that issue once and for all, shouldn't it?
>
> I'll post a modified pom.xml to achieve a versioned site on the weekend, 
> since it's really not too much of a problem to achieve what is required.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Markus
>
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Paul Gier [mailto:[email protected]]
> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 26. Mai 2011 20:54
> An: [email protected]
> Betreff: Re: [mojo-dev] Alternative idea about site publication
>
> 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
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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


Reply via email to