[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: proposal for doc+web sources

From: Valentin Villenave
Subject: Re: proposal for doc+web sources
Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2009 16:02:28 +0200

2009/7/16 John Mandereau <address@hidden>:

> The hourly script is useful to allow any web site maintainer to react
> quickly against typos and minor bugs that don't require fixing the
> Makefile or Python scripts, whereas it could take much longer if you (or
> another maintainer) are the only person that can fix problems. I'm not
> keen on dropping the hourly build unless there are two or three active
> web site maintainers (i.e. people that have a SSH access to Lily main
> web site). The cron hourly job is also handy to quickly publish news
> items. BTW I'm sure Valentin is tempted to say (and I'd agree with him)
> that should be a bit more dynamic than it is currently,
> suppressing the hourly build would not go in the right direction.

No. You don't know me at all. In fact, I want the *complete*
website/documentation to be coded in Flash.
With moving-blinking-flashy little pink stars. Everywhere.


More seriously speaking, I'm not sure if it's sensible to use the
webserver as a /build/ server as well. These are two very different
tasks, and from a security/stability point of view, these two tasks
might put each other at risk. The ideal would be to have two separate
machines to do that, and the webserver should only receive the
ready-to-use website without having to compile or build anything
(other than, maybe, trivial python substitution tasks).

Another point is that, as far as I can see, we're ready to happily
break any existing links to the former documentation, as well as URLs
we've been using for years such as and it's a
bit frightening to imagine that any website or mail that has been
linking to a specific page in the last decade will suddenly cease to
work. Or am I the only one concerned?


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]