incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Michael Wechner <>
Subject Re: [suggestion] making documentation management more lightweight
Date Sat, 05 May 2007 20:54:22 GMT
Leo Simons wrote:

> On May 5, 2007, at 7:55 PM, Michael Wechner wrote:
>> what about a CMS with a workflow, which would sit on top SVN  
>> accessing both branches (staging resp. draft and live) and hence  
>> would allow devs still accessing it through other SVN clients and  
>> also allow updating the live site as static SVN update?
> Ah, that's an old subject! Several people have done prototypes along  
> these lines (I've done about one and a half in python, but in python  
> the most promising codebase is probably (still) SubWiki), and I'll  
> argue something like this ("edit this page" links backed by  
> subversion) is what we "really really want". Mozilla has (or had) it  
> for their site.
> was set up with this in mind, ages ago, and  
> there's still some requirements/designs lying around for how it would  
> work. David Crossley is a good person to ask about it.
> I think one of the problems why this effort has stalled has been that  
> apache has so many CMS or CMS-ish tools that it is really hard to  
> come up with a common way to do things that satisfies enough people  
> to make setting it up worthwhile, so you get into loads of arguing.

well, it seems to me that SVN is the common denominator at the ASF and 
only a tool
which is able to connect to SVN will satisfy enough people within the 
ASF. That's one of the reasons I have spent time how a CMS can use SVN 
as a data repo.

>> We have implemented versioning and workflow into Yulup (http:// 
>>, which is available within the recent trunk version  
>> or next week's release. Yulup does decouple this functionality from  
>> the actual server implementation.
>> I would be happy to help to set something up in case this would  make 
>> sense for the incubator folks.
> I'd rather not see a tool like this for a project-specific setup --  
> anything that writes to SVN needs to be very carefully evaluated for  
> security and stability reasons and be maintained and supported by  
> infrastructure@.

I understand, but I would assume writing to draft/staging SVN on a 
dedicated zone would be less an issue and then allow dedicated people to 
merge from there into the "live SVN" as you describe it above.

> If you're interested in signing up for the "bigger  job", please work 
> with site-dev@ (and infrastructure@).
> I can tell you right now that something "off of trunk" of a non- 
> Apache project that's in a 0.x release series, doesn't document how  
> it uses SVN, and is licensed under the GPL is not that likely to  
> receive a warm welcome immediately. "I could set something up" will  
> also probably receive a healthy amount of scepticism; I wrote a blog  
> post about why that is ages ago:
> all that said, don't let me discourage you (too much)! We could  
> definitely use this, but you'll have to volunteer for (quite) a bit  
> more work and get some others to help out ;-)

I very well understand what you are saying ;-) and I don't want to 
impose anything, but I believe that I finally have the tools at hand to 
do this and I am currently working on this for my own needs. Hence I 
wanted to ask and see how big the skepticism is and I don't mean this 
cynical, but just would like to be constructive.

Anyway I will start with 
and will see how far I will get and will hopefully come back within 
reasonable time :-)



> cheers,
> Leo
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

Michael Wechner
Wyona      -   Open Source Content Management   -    Apache Lenya                          
+41 44 272 91 61

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message