Testing new site configuration on 'publish' branch

[Tobias Bouschen <to...@googlemail.com.INVALID>]

From the last entry on the JIRA, it sounds like we still have to keep
the website build results in the 'content' directory. This will also
require adjusting the '.asf.yaml' file to use 'content/jdo' as the
subdir again. And it might also require setting up the '.htaccess' file
for URL redirection.

But, as I am not quite sure what the final configuration will have to
look like, I would like to manually try it out before adjusting the
automatic publish workflow. For this purpose, I would like to make
different adjustments to the current 'publish' branch to figure out a
working configuration.

As the '.asf.yaml' setup will be the same as before the move to a
separate branch, this should not cause any issues. The testing mainly
regards the redirection stuff.

Would anybody have any issues/reservations regarding this approach?
Otherwise, I would do so some time next week to have a finished setup
for the next JDO conference call.

Best regards,
Tobias

On 23/01/2021 17:25, Craig Russell wrote:
> Hi Tobias,
> 
> I've added a comment to the JIRA.
> 
> I think the problem might be that DB has a mixed configuration. The old CMS system was discontinued last year. [That's why we were forced to change to the new .asf.yaml process.] 
> 
> I'm a bit surprised that the db.apache.org CMS setup is still alive. Perhaps other sub-projects are still using the old system.
> 
> Anyway, let's see what Humbedoo has to say.
> 
> Regards,
> Craig
> 
>> On Jan 23, 2021, at 4:22 AM, Tobias Bouschen <to...@googlemail.com.INVALID> wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> after a long discussion with the INFRA team, it seems like we have gotten to a point were the problem has almost been resolved.
>>
>> The issue seemed to be caused by the backend not being set up to handle our specific use case. It should work in the future, but to avoid putting unnecessary strain on the service I also created a pull request to amend the action to preserve the deploy history (see https://github.com/apache/db-jdo-site/pull/17).
>>
>> The only remaining issue with the setup seems to be where the content is expected to be located (see https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-21326?focusedCommentId=17270643&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels%3Acomment-tabpanel#comment-17270643).
>>
>> I am not sure what they mean by getting the "CMS checkout changed," but it sounds like something that was configured specifically for the old website layout. I am not quite sure how to proceed here. In my opinion, it would be easiest to change the backend configuration to expect the content to be hosted in the root directory. This avoids having additional (and potentially confusing) configuration on our end. But, as already mentioned, I am not familiar with the configuration they mentioned.
>>
>> As this is something that should be discussed before making a decision and the interaction with the INFRA team will most like take a while, I wanted to bring this issue up now instead of waiting until the next standup.
>>
>> So what do you think? How should we proceed with the issue regarding which directory to host the content in?
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Tobias
> 
> Craig L Russell
> clr@apache.org
> 

Re: Testing new site configuration on 'publish' branch

[Craig Russell <ap...@gmail.com>]

Hi Tobias,

I have no problem with your experimenting on the live site.

What I understand is that the db.apache.org site still uses artifacts from the CMS system which is nearing end-of-life-support. But until all of the sub-projects have moved off CMS, it remains like a rusty anchor.

I believe we have experience that content/jdo works. So we can still move forward with your plan to avoid keeping the build artifacts in git except for the orphan branch by adapting the build commands (poms) and the .asf.yaml to publish the live site.

Go for it!
Craig

> On Jan 24, 2021, at 10:23 AM, Tobias Bouschen <to...@googlemail.com.INVALID> wrote:
> 
> From the last entry on the JIRA, it sounds like we still have to keep
> the website build results in the 'content' directory. This will also
> require adjusting the '.asf.yaml' file to use 'content/jdo' as the
> subdir again. And it might also require setting up the '.htaccess' file
> for URL redirection.
> 
> But, as I am not quite sure what the final configuration will have to
> look like, I would like to manually try it out before adjusting the
> automatic publish workflow. For this purpose, I would like to make
> different adjustments to the current 'publish' branch to figure out a
> working configuration.
> 
> As the '.asf.yaml' setup will be the same as before the move to a
> separate branch, this should not cause any issues. The testing mainly
> regards the redirection stuff.
> 
> Would anybody have any issues/reservations regarding this approach?
> Otherwise, I would do so some time next week to have a finished setup
> for the next JDO conference call.
> 
> Best regards,
> Tobias
> 
> On 23/01/2021 17:25, Craig Russell wrote:
>> Hi Tobias,
>> 
>> I've added a comment to the JIRA.
>> 
>> I think the problem might be that DB has a mixed configuration. The old CMS system was discontinued last year. [That's why we were forced to change to the new .asf.yaml process.] 
>> 
>> I'm a bit surprised that the db.apache.org CMS setup is still alive. Perhaps other sub-projects are still using the old system.
>> 
>> Anyway, let's see what Humbedoo has to say.
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Craig
>> 
>>> On Jan 23, 2021, at 4:22 AM, Tobias Bouschen <to...@googlemail.com.INVALID> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi all,
>>> 
>>> after a long discussion with the INFRA team, it seems like we have gotten to a point were the problem has almost been resolved.
>>> 
>>> The issue seemed to be caused by the backend not being set up to handle our specific use case. It should work in the future, but to avoid putting unnecessary strain on the service I also created a pull request to amend the action to preserve the deploy history (see https://github.com/apache/db-jdo-site/pull/17).
>>> 
>>> The only remaining issue with the setup seems to be where the content is expected to be located (see https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-21326?focusedCommentId=17270643&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels%3Acomment-tabpanel#comment-17270643).
>>> 
>>> I am not sure what they mean by getting the "CMS checkout changed," but it sounds like something that was configured specifically for the old website layout. I am not quite sure how to proceed here. In my opinion, it would be easiest to change the backend configuration to expect the content to be hosted in the root directory. This avoids having additional (and potentially confusing) configuration on our end. But, as already mentioned, I am not familiar with the configuration they mentioned.
>>> 
>>> As this is something that should be discussed before making a decision and the interaction with the INFRA team will most like take a while, I wanted to bring this issue up now instead of waiting until the next standup.
>>> 
>>> So what do you think? How should we proceed with the issue regarding which directory to host the content in?
>>> 
>>> Best regards,
>>> Tobias
>> 
>> Craig L Russell
>> clr@apache.org
>> 

Craig L Russell
clr@apache.org