On 10/29/06, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Wasn't a vote yet, however it seems a consensus was reached.
Now the time is to see what issues lie ahead when we persue this avenue.
One of those issues is the CLA's for the existing documentation that
is part of the imported Wiki.
t
Wasn't a vote yet, however it seems a consensus was reached.
Now the time is to see what issues lie ahead when we persue this avenue.
One of those issues is the CLA's for the existing documentation that
is part of the imported Wiki.
The other is whether we are able to tweak the stylesheet that
didnt know the vote was closed/decision made
-igor
On 10/29/06, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Heh... You busy man you!
Here's what you wrote:
On 10/19/06, Igor Vaynberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> my vote is also for confluence.
>
> the cms looses a lot of its appeal if it do
Heh... You busy man you!
Here's what you wrote:
On 10/19/06, Igor Vaynberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
my vote is also for confluence.
the cms looses a lot of its appeal if it doesnt have an auto-export plugin -
because then we run into some of the the same roadblocks as mvn site.
-Igor
On 1
my vote is also for confluence.
the cms looses a lot of its appeal if it doesnt have an auto-export plugin -
because then we run into some of the the same roadblocks as mvn site.
-Igor
On 10/19/06, Gwyn Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 19/10/06, Upayavira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Gwyn
On 19/10/06, Upayavira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Gwyn Evans wrote:
> Hmm - I expect it's "possible", but I'm not so sure about "possible
> for us"! :-) It's down to Confluence templating, which I've not
> really looked at as yet!
The autoexport stuff is written by my friend Pier. I can put you
Gwyn Evans wrote:
Hmm - I expect it's "possible", but I'm not so sure about "possible
for us"! :-) It's down to Confluence templating, which I've not
really looked at as yet!
The autoexport stuff is written by my friend Pier. I can put you in
contact should you have otherwise unanswerable que
Hmm - I expect it's "possible", but I'm not so sure about "possible
for us"! :-) It's down to Confluence templating, which I've not
really looked at as yet!
/Gwyn
On 19/10/06, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
So something like www.springone.com is possible for us? (but then much
mor
So something like www.springone.com is possible for us? (but then much
more purtier)
Martijn
On 10/19/06, Gwyn Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 19/10/06, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> How is the export facilities of confluence,
Just to answer this one, it's in-place & seems
On 19/10/06, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
How is the export facilities of confluence,
Just to answer this one, it's in-place & seems to be triggered by the
updates, rather than periodical, so very fast.
From the docs, the Auto-Export plugin can have a different template
per s
On 19/10/06, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
All,
What is the future of our website in relation to content management?
With that I mean do we:
1 - continue generating our sites using maven, and put them on Apache turf
To do this, I /think/ it's just a matter of checking in the bu
Martijn Dashorst wrote:
On 10/19/06, Upayavira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Options 1 and 2 are straight-forward within Apache.
Option 3 would be possible, although you would be better asking for
wicket.zones.apache.org (a Solaris zone) and running Joomla there - so
that the source content is stor
On 10/19/06, Upayavira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Options 1 and 2 are straight-forward within Apache.
Option 3 would be possible, although you would be better asking for
wicket.zones.apache.org (a Solaris zone) and running Joomla there - so
that the source content is stored on Apache hardware.
On 10/19/06, Frank Bille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 10/19/06, Upayavira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Option 3 would be possible, although you would be better asking for
> wicket.zones.apache.org (a Solaris zone) and running Joomla there - so
> that the source content is stored on Apache hard
On 10/19/06, Upayavira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Option 3 would be possible, although you would be better asking for
wicket.zones.apache.org (a Solaris zone) and running Joomla there - so
that the source content is stored on Apache hardware.
That sounds like we can run Joomla on apache hardw
Martijn Dashorst wrote:
All,
What is the future of our website in relation to content management?
With that I mean do we:
1 - continue generating our sites using maven, and put them on Apache turf
2 - use confluence and export it into some static format and put them
on Apache turf
3 - use jooml
16 matches
Mail list logo
