+1
On 04/19/2016 08:03 PM, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
Hi folks,
Short version:
As per the title, I'd like to vote on moving the website bits to a Git
repo, specifically "qpid-site".
Further info:
The site is one of the single largest groups of stuff we have, both
with regard to its previous release content and for the additions of
various new releases as they occur. That's in terms of both overall
file size and especially the overall number of files. On the latter
point, this makes using Subversion particularly slow; for example it
took well over 30mins just to check in the website updates I made
yesterday. I literally had to leave and come back later because it
took so long.
Support for Git based sites have been offered by infra for some time
now [1]. Things work in essentially the same manner to our current
Subversion based site, whereby upon checkin the 'content' bits then
get published to the web servers. The only real difference is that the
site stuff must exist in the 'asf-site' branch of a particular git
repo, either the same one as general code or just a dedicated separate
repo. In our case a dedicated repo seems to makes the most sense, and
again it seems to be what various other projects do (even the
otherwise single-repo projects).
[1] https://blogs.apache.org/infra/entry/git_based_websites_available
Robbie
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@qpid.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@qpid.apache.org
.
--
Tim Bish
twitter: @tabish121
blog: http://timbish.blogspot.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@qpid.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@qpid.apache.org
