On 8/20/12 10:02 PM, Ariel Constenla-Haile wrote: > On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 09:49:52PM +0200, Marcus (OOo) wrote: >> @all: >> >> Sorry but IMHO this process failed. Just today evening (Hamburg >> time) someone has published again website changes. >> >> If we rely on a process that is so fragile, then IMHO we shouldn't >> do this. Because there will be always somebody: >> >> - who doesn't know this >> >> - who isn't aware of the consequences of her/his changes >> (do you all know that a change on a NL webpage will also >> publish everything else in staging?) >> >> - who hasn't seen a "please don't publish the website until further >> notice" mail >> (to be honest, I haven't seen a clear note that is >> forbidden at the moment, too) >> >> - etc. >> >> The other solution would be to completely not change anything (incl. >> no commits) to the website until the release is, e.g., 1 hour away >> which is also nothing I would like to see as it's not flexible >> enough. >> >> Are there other opinions/suggestions? > > The ideal would be if the CMS could have an option to lock publishing so > that no-one publishes the site, not even by mistake. Sure someone from > knows if this is possible or just an ideal, though impossible solution. >
or even a more fine grained publishing process by marking the files explicitly. I think of 2 mode, publish all or selected files only. Juergen
