On Sun, Jun 3, 2018 at 4:36 PM, Stuart Young <cef...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Perhaps just have the archive as a separate repo that gets pulled in by > the main ci yaml at build, just to populate the archives directory? > I was thinking something along those lines too. It would be easy enough to have a git repo for the tarballs and just combine the two as part of the CI script. --Jason > This avoids any possible submodule breakage (just not worth it here IMO), > with no chance of accidentally pulling down all the archives. I know a > few people who have git shortcuts that update submodules by default for > example, whether they exist or not. > > Also I personally think the archives dir needs a bit of re-org/cleanup to > make it a bit more persistent over time (eg: like moving the old stuff into > the older-versions dir effectively breaks links for distros, etc). That's > getting more into content, but it'd be worth exploring if that should/would > get done before or after the move to a git repo (ie: would it being in git > make the process harder/a nightmare if it was to happen). > > > On 4 June 2018 at 06:19, Daniel Stone <dan...@fooishbar.org> wrote: > >> Hi Laura, >> >> On 25 May 2018 at 01:27, Laura Ekstrand <la...@jlekstrand.net> wrote: >> > When reviewing these patches, please note: >> > 1. This patch series does *not* touch content. Please do not >> bikeshed >> > the content of webpages here. That will be addressed in >> later >> > commits. >> > 2. Please do *not* bikeshed website style here. We are using >> the >> > classic ReadTheDocs style for now and we will update style >> in a >> > future commit. >> > 3. I've done my best to make your current content look >> beautiful. If >> > there's a problem, please let me know. >> > 4. There were some commits to the website between when I >> started this >> > series and now. I've done my best to incorporate your >> changes. >> > So if you changed your content in the past two weeks, take a >> look >> > at your page. >> >> One thing I've just remembered is that https://www.mesa3d.org/archive/ >> serves all the tarballs for Mesa releases. Given how Pages is >> structured, we don't have a good way to redirect these to the old >> server, so the Pages repository needs to hold all the tarballs. This >> probably suggests to me that the site should live in a different repo, >> where we can just commit all the tarballs. >> >> I reflexively didn't love the idea of committing tarballs to a git >> repository, but the more I think about it, the more I like the idea. >> It makes it more clear where they're coming from, makes the provenance >> easier to verify, gives us audit logs of who put them in, and so on. >> >> Cheers, >> Daniel >> _______________________________________________ >> mesa-dev mailing list >> mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org >> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev >> > > > > -- > Stuart Young (aka Cefiar) > > _______________________________________________ > mesa-dev mailing list > mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev > >
_______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev