[INFO] Karaf and ServiceMix website

[jbonofre]

Hi all,

as you probably know, the Apache Infrastructure team has mandated that
all projects move to the new svnpubsub process for publishing their
website by the end of the year.

The purpose is to reduce the sync time and the I/O required to the sync.

The Infra worked with the Maven team, and a simple mvn site:deploy works
fine.
However, as our website use scalate, we do:

mvn install
mvn scalate:deploy

So it's not a pure mvn site:deploy.

I'm going to discuss with Joe (from the Infra) to see if it could work
"out of the box" using scalate:deploy or if we need to perform some
update on scalate to use something similar to site:deploy.

A possible workaround is to use:

mvn scalate:sitegen
mvn site:deploy

I think it should work.

I will keep you posted about that.

Regards
JB
--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
[hidden email]
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com

[James Strachan-2]

FWIW scalate:deploy is using pretty much identical code under the
covers- reusing the same mvn wagon stuff to do the upload; so I'd have
thought it'd just work.

On 9 March 2012 07:45, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> as you probably know, the Apache Infrastructure team has mandated that all
> projects move to the new svnpubsub process for publishing their website by
> the end of the year.
>
> The purpose is to reduce the sync time and the I/O required to the sync.
>
> The Infra worked with the Maven team, and a simple mvn site:deploy works
> fine.
> However, as our website use scalate, we do:
>
> mvn install
> mvn scalate:deploy
>
> So it's not a pure mvn site:deploy.
>
> I'm going to discuss with Joe (from the Infra) to see if it could work "out
> of the box" using scalate:deploy or if we need to perform some update on
> scalate to use something similar to site:deploy.
>
> A possible workaround is to use:
>
> mvn scalate:sitegen
> mvn site:deploy
>
> I think it should work.
>
> I will keep you posted about that.
>
> Regards
> JB
> --
> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> [hidden email]
> http://blog.nanthrax.net
> Talend - http://www.talend.com

--
James
-------
FuseSource
Email: [hidden email]
Web: http://fusesource.com
Twitter: jstrachan, fusenews
Blog: http://macstrac.blogspot.com/

Open Source Integration and Messaging

[jbonofre]

Thanks for the update James and awesome ;)

It was the only part that I planned to verify ;)

The other things is the way that we publish the documentation on the
website (the location on people.apache.org especially).

Thanks again,
Regards
JB

On 03/09/2012 09:03 AM, James Strachan wrote:

> FWIW scalate:deploy is using pretty much identical code under the
> covers- reusing the same mvn wagon stuff to do the upload; so I'd have
> thought it'd just work.
>
> On 9 March 2012 07:45, Jean-Baptiste Onofré<[hidden email]>  wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> as you probably know, the Apache Infrastructure team has mandated that all
>> projects move to the new svnpubsub process for publishing their website by
>> the end of the year.
>>
>> The purpose is to reduce the sync time and the I/O required to the sync.
>>
>> The Infra worked with the Maven team, and a simple mvn site:deploy works
>> fine.
>> However, as our website use scalate, we do:
>>
>> mvn install
>> mvn scalate:deploy
>>
>> So it's not a pure mvn site:deploy.
>>
>> I'm going to discuss with Joe (from the Infra) to see if it could work "out
>> of the box" using scalate:deploy or if we need to perform some update on
>> scalate to use something similar to site:deploy.
>>
>> A possible workaround is to use:
>>
>> mvn scalate:sitegen
>> mvn site:deploy
>>
>> I think it should work.
>>
>> I will keep you posted about that.
>>
>> Regards
>> JB
>> --
>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>> [hidden email]
>> http://blog.nanthrax.net
>> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>
>
>

--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
[hidden email]
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com

[Olivier Lamy]

Hello

2012/3/9 Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[hidden email]>:

> Hi all,
>
> as you probably know, the Apache Infrastructure team has mandated that all
> projects move to the new svnpubsub process for publishing their website by
> the end of the year.
>
> The purpose is to reduce the sync time and the I/O required to the sync.
>
> The Infra worked with the Maven team, and a simple mvn site:deploy works
> fine.

Not exactly.
The usual site:deploy won't work anymore as today.
Some start of doc: http://www.apache.org/dev/cmsadoption.html#maven .
Basically a buildbot job pool svn to know if there are some changes in
svn (with maven site xdoc or apt files), if yes mvn site is launched
in a maven build and content/diff of generated site is committed to
svn. Then with asf cms ui you have to publish the site.
You can probably discuss with joe to have a test instance as we did for maven.

HTH,
--
Olivier

> However, as our website use scalate, we do:
>
> mvn install
> mvn scalate:deploy
>
> So it's not a pure mvn site:deploy.
>
> I'm going to discuss with Joe (from the Infra) to see if it could work "out
> of the box" using scalate:deploy or if we need to perform some update on
> scalate to use something similar to site:deploy.
>
> A possible workaround is to use:
>
> mvn scalate:sitegen
> mvn site:deploy
>
> I think it should work.
>
> I will keep you posted about that.
>
> Regards
> JB
> --
> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> [hidden email]
> http://blog.nanthrax.net
> Talend - http://www.talend.com

--
Olivier Lamy
Talend: http://coders.talend.com
http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy

[jbonofre]

Thanks for the update Olivier.

I think it should work as the pubsub can monitor a location whatever the
content is. It can run a Jenkins build just after.
I will keep you posted about the result of the Joe's talk.

Regards
JB

On 03/10/2012 03:02 PM, Olivier Lamy wrote:

> Hello
>
> 2012/3/9 Jean-Baptiste Onofré<[hidden email]>:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> as you probably know, the Apache Infrastructure team has mandated that all
>> projects move to the new svnpubsub process for publishing their website by
>> the end of the year.
>>
>> The purpose is to reduce the sync time and the I/O required to the sync.
>>
>> The Infra worked with the Maven team, and a simple mvn site:deploy works
>> fine.
> Not exactly.
> The usual site:deploy won't work anymore as today.
> Some start of doc: http://www.apache.org/dev/cmsadoption.html#maven .
> Basically a buildbot job pool svn to know if there are some changes in
> svn (with maven site xdoc or apt files), if yes mvn site is launched
> in a maven build and content/diff of generated site is committed to
> svn. Then with asf cms ui you have to publish the site.
> You can probably discuss with joe to have a test instance as we did for maven.
>
> HTH,
> --
> Olivier
>
>> However, as our website use scalate, we do:
>>
>> mvn install
>> mvn scalate:deploy
>>
>> So it's not a pure mvn site:deploy.
>>
>> I'm going to discuss with Joe (from the Infra) to see if it could work "out
>> of the box" using scalate:deploy or if we need to perform some update on
>> scalate to use something similar to site:deploy.
>>
>> A possible workaround is to use:
>>
>> mvn scalate:sitegen
>> mvn site:deploy
>>
>> I think it should work.
>>
>> I will keep you posted about that.
>>
>> Regards
>> JB
>> --
>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>> [hidden email]
>> http://blog.nanthrax.net
>> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>
>
>

--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
[hidden email]
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com