On 10/31/12, Rob Weir <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 2:05 PM, Alexandro Colorado <[email protected]> wrote: >> On 10/31/12, Rob Weir <[email protected]> wrote: >>> http://www.openoffice.org/l10n-new/ >> >> why do we have a different directory, wouldnt it be just better to have >> >> http://www.openoffice.org/l10n/new.html >> >> Doesnt make sense to have two Localization projects/folders. >> > > Long term, it does not. For review it is perfectly fine. Once we've > debugged it and are agreed on the new site, then of course we replace > the old directory with this one.
I am sorry, this doesn't make sense, sounds like the plan of the plan. I would go on commiting the data and if there are changes or rollbacks, just update the pages/sites. That's the whole point of using a version control system/wiki IMO. AFAIK just unlinking will have a non-destructive effect to the past content if we are trying to preserve things live, otherwise it will just go on the revision history. I looked at the l10n-new and not a lot of data is in it, I would just merge it back with l10n and comment whatever seems 'outdated'. > > -Rob > >>> >>> This is based on a contribution from Jan. >>> >>> You can look at the source is Subversion: >>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/ooo/ooo-site/trunk/content/l10n-new/ >>> >>> It looks like Jan is trying some clever work customizing the website >>> template and server-side includes. But it looks like it is >>> conflicting with (or is being applied in duplicate to) the site-wide >>> template. >>> >>> Dave might have some ideas here. But in general I think we want to >>> avoid having duplicate copies of site-wide items, like Google >>> Analytics declarations. >>> >>> -Rob >>> >> >> >> -- >> Alexandro Colorado >> PPMC Apache OpenOffice >> http://es.openoffice.org > -- Alexandro Colorado PPMC Apache OpenOffice http://es.openoffice.org
