Made the move in r896614, and filed INFRA-2421 to request the reconfiguration of svnpubsub.
-Hyrum On Jan 5, 2010, at 1:06 PM, Hyrum K. Wright wrote: > > On Jan 5, 2010, at 1:02 PM, Greg Stein wrote: > >> It's more than just a folder rename, since we have to reconfigure >> stuff on the server. >> >> Hyrum: what kind of "related" stuff are you talking about? And why >> would it then be in a folder called "site" when it isn't ON the site? > > I'm specifically thinking of stuff used to generate the site, should we chose > to go that route. Look at > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/public/trunk/ for an example (that > directory is our equivalent of /subversion/site/). > > Doing a move now, when we don't really have much content is much easier than > trying to do it down the road. It doesn't hurt us at all, but opens up > options, should we chose to use them. > > -Hyrum > >> >> On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 13:56, Mark Phippard <[email protected]> wrote: >>> On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 1:47 PM, Hyrum K. Wright >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> We recently moved all of our web content out of trunk and into it's own >>>> top-level directory, >>>> called site/. I propose we move it once more to site/publish/. This >>>> would allow us to put >>>> additional related-but-not-published material in the site/ directory, and >>>> follows precedent in >>>> other Apache projects. >>>> >>>> If there are no objections, I'll do the move and file a corresponding >>>> ticket with the infra group >>>> tomorrow. >>> >>> It is ultimately just a folder name in the repos, so I cannot see >>> anyone objecting ... and I do not. I am curious what sort of items >>> would go in /site though? >>> >>> -- >>> Thanks >>> >>> Mark Phippard >>> http://markphip.blogspot.com/ >>> >
