You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to jdo-dev@db.apache.org by Craig L Russell <cr...@oracle.com> on 2012/12/04 21:40:36 UTC
Fwd: Mandatory svnpubsub migration by Jan 2013
Please read. We should discuss this at the weekly conference if not
before (on email).
Craig
Begin forwarded message:
> From: Rick Hillegas <ri...@oracle.com>
> Date: December 3, 2012 7:43:34 AM PST
> To: private@db.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Mandatory svnpubsub migration by Jan 2013
> Reply-To: private@db.apache.org
>
> The PMC has about a month left to perform the tasks outlined by the
> attached email. I have tried to wrap my mind around what we need to
> do. Here's what I understand.
>
> 1) The way it is today: Today the /www/db.apache.org directory on
> minotaur holds the source for all of the content of the Apache db
> website. Once an hour, a background process looks for changes to
> the /www/db.apache.org directory tree. Changes are then propagated
> to the actual production website. This is why you have to wait an
> hour for your changes to actually turn up on the Apache website.
>
> 2) What is changing: As of January 2013, the /www/db.apache.org tree
> will no longer be treated as the content source for the Apache db
> website. The background process will be disabled. Changes made to
> that directory tree will not be propagated to the Apache website.
>
> 3) What we need to do: There are three ways to migrate our content
> so that changes will propagate to the Apache website:
>
> 3a) For content which is already under subversion control, there is
> very little to do. We just have to create an INFRA issue telling the
> Infrastructure team where the subversion source lives and what
> Apache website address it corresponds to. Here are some examples of
> these INFRA issues: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/
> INFRA-5505, https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-5313, https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-4217
> .
>
> 3b) For content which is not already under subversion control, put
> it under subversion control and then see step (3a).
>
> 3c) Alternatively, uncontrolled content can be re-produced using
> Apache CMS. Apache CMS uses subversion as its repository. After
> converting content to Apache CMS, I believe that we would need to
> file an INFRA issue, telling the Infrastructure team to use the new
> CMS source to populate the Apache website address.
>
> Here's the current status of website content for the DB projects:
>
> Already under subversion control:
>
> - Derby (mostly)
> - JDO
>
> Not already under subversion control:
>
> - DB umbrella site (at db.apache.org)
> - DdlUtils
> - ObjectRelationalBridge
> - Torque
>
> I volunteer to do the following tasks:
>
> - Migrate Derby (to be described in a follow-up email)
> - Migrate the DB umbrella site (basically ask the Infrastructure
> team to use Kristian's CMS conversion, which is described here: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-5215)
>
> We need volunteers to migrate the following subprojects:
>
> - JDO
> - DdlUtils
> - ObjectRelationalBridge
> - Torque
>
> Thanks,
> -Rick
>
>
> On 2/9/12 2:47 AM, Kristian Waagan wrote:
>> On 08.02.2012 13:26, Joe Schaefer wrote:
>>> [PLEASE DO NOT RESPOND TO THIS POST! DIRECT ALL FURTHER
>>> INQUIRIES TO infrastructure@apache.org]
>>
>> Seems like we have some decisions to make on this one.
>>
>> The email from Joe contains several different things we have to
>> discuss. The two major items are:
>> o web site publishing
>> o release distribution
>>
>> Both of these must be performed by using svnpubsub before January
>> 2013. Web site publishing applies to the DB TLP and the various
>> subprojects, whereas release distribution applies to the
>> subprojects only since the DB TLP doesn't release any artifacts.
>> Note that using the CMS is optional; if the project is checking in
>> their generated site docs to a Subversion repository, svnpubsub can
>> be setup to pull the site from there.
>>
>> Is the general mailing list the correct place to discuss the matter
>> applying to the DB TLP?
>> Further, should each subproject discuss this on their respective
>> dev lists?
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>
Craig L Russell
Architect, Oracle
http://db.apache.org/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@oracle.com
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
Re: Fwd: Mandatory svnpubsub migration by Jan 2013
Posted by mc...@sonic.net.
As I understand the issue, we fall under path 3a, because our web
content is already under version control. Therefore, all we need to do is
to create an INFRA issue for the migration of our content.
--Michelle
> Please read. We should discuss this at the weekly conference if not
> before (on email).
>
> Craig
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
>> From: Rick Hillegas <ri...@oracle.com>
>> Date: December 3, 2012 7:43:34 AM PST
>> To: private@db.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: Mandatory svnpubsub migration by Jan 2013
>> Reply-To: private@db.apache.org
>>
>> The PMC has about a month left to perform the tasks outlined by the
>> attached email. I have tried to wrap my mind around what we need to
>> do. Here's what I understand.
>>
>> 1) The way it is today: Today the /www/db.apache.org directory on
>> minotaur holds the source for all of the content of the Apache db
>> website. Once an hour, a background process looks for changes to
>> the /www/db.apache.org directory tree. Changes are then propagated
>> to the actual production website. This is why you have to wait an
>> hour for your changes to actually turn up on the Apache website.
>>
>> 2) What is changing: As of January 2013, the /www/db.apache.org tree
>> will no longer be treated as the content source for the Apache db
>> website. The background process will be disabled. Changes made to
>> that directory tree will not be propagated to the Apache website.
>>
>> 3) What we need to do: There are three ways to migrate our content
>> so that changes will propagate to the Apache website:
>>
>> 3a) For content which is already under subversion control, there is
>> very little to do. We just have to create an INFRA issue telling the
>> Infrastructure team where the subversion source lives and what
>> Apache website address it corresponds to. Here are some examples of
>> these INFRA issues: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/
>> INFRA-5505, https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-5313,
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-4217
>> .
>>
>> 3b) For content which is not already under subversion control, put
>> it under subversion control and then see step (3a).
>>
>> 3c) Alternatively, uncontrolled content can be re-produced using
>> Apache CMS. Apache CMS uses subversion as its repository. After
>> converting content to Apache CMS, I believe that we would need to
>> file an INFRA issue, telling the Infrastructure team to use the new
>> CMS source to populate the Apache website address.
>>
>> Here's the current status of website content for the DB projects:
>>
>> Already under subversion control:
>>
>> - Derby (mostly)
>> - JDO
>>
>> Not already under subversion control:
>>
>> - DB umbrella site (at db.apache.org)
>> - DdlUtils
>> - ObjectRelationalBridge
>> - Torque
>>
>> I volunteer to do the following tasks:
>>
>> - Migrate Derby (to be described in a follow-up email)
>> - Migrate the DB umbrella site (basically ask the Infrastructure
>> team to use Kristian's CMS conversion, which is described here:
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-5215)
>>
>> We need volunteers to migrate the following subprojects:
>>
>> - JDO
>> - DdlUtils
>> - ObjectRelationalBridge
>> - Torque
>>
>> Thanks,
>> -Rick
>>
>>
>> On 2/9/12 2:47 AM, Kristian Waagan wrote:
>>> On 08.02.2012 13:26, Joe Schaefer wrote:
>>>> [PLEASE DO NOT RESPOND TO THIS POST! DIRECT ALL FURTHER
>>>> INQUIRIES TO infrastructure@apache.org]
>>>
>>> Seems like we have some decisions to make on this one.
>>>
>>> The email from Joe contains several different things we have to
>>> discuss. The two major items are:
>>> o web site publishing
>>> o release distribution
>>>
>>> Both of these must be performed by using svnpubsub before January
>>> 2013. Web site publishing applies to the DB TLP and the various
>>> subprojects, whereas release distribution applies to the
>>> subprojects only since the DB TLP doesn't release any artifacts.
>>> Note that using the CMS is optional; if the project is checking in
>>> their generated site docs to a Subversion repository, svnpubsub can
>>> be setup to pull the site from there.
>>>
>>> Is the general mailing list the correct place to discuss the matter
>>> applying to the DB TLP?
>>> Further, should each subproject discuss this on their respective
>>> dev lists?
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>
>
> Craig L Russell
> Architect, Oracle
> http://db.apache.org/jdo
> 408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@oracle.com
> P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
>
>