On 21 August 2012 22:23, Daniel Shahaf <danie...@apache.org> wrote: > sebb wrote on Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 16:04:12 +0100: >> On 21 August 2012 13:43, Daniel Shahaf <danie...@apache.org> wrote: >> > Jürgen Schmidt wrote on Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 14:38:34 +0200: >> >> 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. >> >> >> > >> > That would be easy to implement (given a list of filenames you'd just >> > svnmucc copy those files from staging/ to production/); check with Joe >> > what he thinks of such a potential feature? >> >> This may be obvious to all readers, but just in case: >> For this to be fool-proof, I think there would need to be some way to >> prevent anyone bypassing the selection. >> > > Why? Could very well have a "publish all changes" mode (the current > only option) alongside the "cherry picking" (publish only selected file) > mode.
This thread started because something was published inadvertently. If the purpose of the enhancement is to prevent this happening, then there needs to be some barrier that prevents inadvertent publication. > BTW Joe, the equivalent code in svn should be the commit harvester in > the client. > >> > >> >> Juergen
