Hello again,

I've moved to maven site building. See
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JAMES-1374?focusedCommentId=13276653#comment-13276653
for details.

As I see it we are in straight line for complete CMS migration. There
are a few things to fix: move all the site xdocs to site-cms and
provide svn:externals definition back to the project.

After this we will have the old site with a new build system, docs
with the project and automatic site building on documentation update
commit.

Cheers,

2012/5/11 Ioan Eugen Stan <[email protected]>:
> 2012/5/11 Stefano Bagnara <[email protected]>:
>> 2012/5/11 Ioan Eugen Stan <[email protected]>:
>>>> My concerns:
>>>> - Have uniform skin between cms and mvn generated pages.
>>>> - Have on all pages the left menu which has 3 parts: the suproject links,
>>>> the reports links and the top james links (about, download, asf).
>>>> - Have on all pages the same top menu with the list of projects.
>>>
>>> We currently don't have any of these. The layout changes when you move
>>> from project to project because each project has it's own site that it
>>> inherits. There is no common parent for all projects.
>>
>> I don't get this. All of james website and products use the same
>> layout and the same top-menu.
>> Sometimes you will get "older" versions because we never updated some
>> product (so maybe latest changes to the skin have not yet inherited by
>> older projects).
>> But, overall, the skin is the same across the whole website (excluding
>> javadocs and xrefs).
>
> Sorry, my mistake. I noticed the update date in the upper right a bit late.
>
>>> The top menu is also different from project to project: different
>>> ordering and different sizes in CSS and even missing elements. For
>>> example http://james.apache.org/jspf/index.html is missing home,
>>> mailbox, project. Just click on all top menu entries and you will see
>>> for yourself.
>>>
>>> A solution for this is to move the mvn site templates to svn:externals
>>> (to skin project maybe) and import them in every project. This way we
>>> might solve the uniformity issue.
>>
>> A solution is to update the maven generated websites.
>> Either way you are replying to the objection that the whole shouldn't
>> be different saying that currently we have minor differences like one
>> menu voice or different css padding: doesn't sound fair.
>
> Yes, we should update them more often. CMS will hopefully enable
> automatic update on change. About the difference in CSS: I'm just
> saying that it's sloppy and a very unprofessional look that we
> promote.
>
>> To fix the difference we would just need to update the parent pom to
>> every product "trunk" and deploy the website for each of them: I did
>> that a couple of years ago, but I had no time since then to update (to
>> be fair this should have been done/scheduled by the people that
>> updated the skin).
>>
>> So the FIX to this issue is to update each product and not to put one
>> more skin in the mix ;-)
>> As I told previously I predict CMS will not replace all of our website
>> docs and we will still generate some of them using maven, so you will
>> have to regenerate maven projects anyway, whatever you do with CMS.
>> One way to improve this would be to create a meta-skin for maven that
>> will output pages without the common parts and then have CMS use the
>> maven output as input and add the common parts before publishing: this
>> will create a double commit on each page changes (and maybe more
>> complex workflow), not sure it worth it, but I'm not against a similar
>> solution.
>
> After following all the discussions and the requirements put on so far
> I've came to the conclusion that it's best to keep the site building
> as is and use maven. This was mentioned on the jira issue but the
> documentation is very scarce.
>
> I'm looking over to http://maventest.apache.org. See Maven at the end
> of www.apache.org/dev/cmsadoption.html  .
>
> Source is here 
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/maven/site/branches/INFRA-4466/trunk/
>  .
>
> Let's hope it supports externals so we can keep our docs where they
> are. If not, we might be required to do some merging of sources from
> one tree to another just to keep the docs with the sources and have a
> uniform site.
>
>>> Indeed, very confusing and my opinion is that having the sidebar
>>> change that much with every project is creating even more confusion.
>>> We should strive for uniform pages but I don't know what support
>>> maven site has for template inheritance, so it might not be possible.
>>> I will look into it.
>>
>> Here is the maven skin:
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/james/skin/trunk/src/main/resources/META-INF/maven/site.vm
>>
>> and here the common resources used by the skin:
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/james/skin/trunk/src/main/resources/
>>
>> Here is the structure defined by our "parent project":
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/james/project/trunk/src/site/site.xml
>>
>> And here is a definition for a single project:
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/james/mime4j/trunk/src/site/site.xml
>>
>> The different outputs are a consequence of products referencing an
>> older parent project (that have a different layout).
>>
>>> @Stefano: We might not loose browser editing. I'm not sure but I think
>>> the bookmarklet will resolve the source that generated the page even
>>> if it's not markdown formatted, by looking at which reg-exp from
>>> path.pm it matches.
>
> I got that finally :). Thanks.
>
>> OK, good.
>> How is permission to the editing handled? Does it ask for svn
>> credentials or what else?
>> My question is about who can edit the pages: if we plan to move the
>> wiki content then we should have a way to let non-james-committers to
>> write changes. We don't want anonymous, but will we be able to let
>> every asf member to submit doc changes?
>
> Well, there is authoring and publish. Authoring trigger builds that go
> into an online staging area. (http://james.staging.apache.org for us)
> Publishing moves them to production (james.apache.org). More people
> should be allowed to author because the changes need to get published
> to get to production/live. So it should be supported but I don't know
> many details. We'll find out more along the way.
>
>> Stefano
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Ioan Eugen Stan
> http://ieugen.blogspot.com/  *** http://bucharest-jug.github.com/ ***



-- 
Ioan Eugen Stan
http://ieugen.blogspot.com/  *** http://bucharest-jug.github.com/ ***

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to