|
Home > Archive > Apache Mod-Python > June 2005 > Managing and updating the web site
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Managing and updating the web site
|
|
| Nicolas Lehuen 2005-06-07, 5:48 pm |
| Grisha, can you tell us what is the process to release a new version,
including the update of the web site ?
Maybe include the web site source files in the subversion repository,
so that we can edit it ?
As for building the HTML documentation out of the LaTeX files, I'm a
bit at a loss... Has anyone managed to do it ?
Regards,
Nicolas
| |
| Jim Gallacher 2005-06-07, 5:48 pm |
| Nicolas Lehuen wrote:
> Grisha, can you tell us what is the process to release a new version,
> including the update of the web site ?
>
> Maybe include the web site source files in the subversion repository,
> so that we can edit it ?
>
> As for building the HTML documentation out of the LaTeX files, I'm a
> bit at a loss... Has anyone managed to do it ?
Yes.
Jim
| |
| Nicolas Lehuen 2005-06-07, 5:48 pm |
| 2005/6/7, Jim Gallacher <jg.lists@sympatico.ca>:
> Nicolas Lehuen wrote:
>=20
> Yes.
>=20
> Jim
Great, so Jim, from now on, you're our official HTML documentation builder =
 .
Regards,
Nicolas
| |
| Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy 2005-06-07, 5:48 pm |
|
On Tue, 7 Jun 2005, Nicolas Lehuen wrote:
> Grisha, can you tell us what is the process to release a new version,
> including the update of the web site ?
Updating the site is trivial, I can do it, that's the last thing to worry
about. Releasing a new version is a bit more complicated.
The instructions for making the actual tgz file are at the bottom of
Doc/Makefile file. I have no idea why I decided to stick them there,
perhaps it's better to create a separate file called
Doc/release-instructions.txt or something.
The instructions were written with CVS in mind so we'll need to figure out
the SVN counterparts of the required commands.
You'll definitely need to be on a unix machine of some sort that has TeTeX
installed to produce the documentation, it's actually pretty easy.
This being a somewhat major release, I think we should perhaps tag it
3.2.0-rc1 (to be followed by rc2, etc).
Once the tgz file is ready we will need to collect votes on the list to
make sure it actually works. Once it's been tested anough by the
folks on the list (we need 4 or more I think) enough votes are collected,
it can be released on the apache site and formally announced.
Grisha
| |
| Jim Gallacher 2005-06-07, 5:48 pm |
| Nicolas Lehuen wrote:
> 2005/6/7, Jim Gallacher <jg.lists@sympatico.ca>:
>
>
>
> Great, so Jim, from now on, you're our official HTML documentation builder .
That would be fine.
What's the mechanism for this, since the generated docs are not in
subversion? Presumably, when the release is ready you'll create a
branch, and then the docs will get committed to that branch?
Same question for the generated psp.c (using flex) and configure,
generated from configure.in with autoconf.
Regards,
Jim
| |
| Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy 2005-06-08, 2:46 am |
|
On Tue, 7 Jun 2005, Jim Gallacher wrote:
> What's the mechanism for this, since the generated docs are not in
> subversion?
The docs _are_ in subversion, but in .tex format. The html is included in
the distribution tar file for convenience, but I don't think it'd make
sense to have both tex and html in svn.
> Presumably, when the release is ready you'll create a branch, and then
> the docs will get committed to that branch?
I think that generating the docs is the trickiest part of making the
release tarball, so you might as well just do the whole thing :-) Or I
could do it, but I'd really sleep better knowing that I am not alone able
to create a tarball.
> Same question for the generated psp.c (using flex) and configure, generated
> from configure.in with autoconf.
The generated psp.c is there just in case you don't have flex (especially
because a specific version of flex is required). I guess it's similar to
../configure - in theory there is no need to keep it since it is
autogenerated from configure.in, but most projects do it anyway...
Grisha
| |
| Jim Gallacher 2005-06-08, 2:46 am |
| Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy wrote:
>
> On Tue, 7 Jun 2005, Jim Gallacher wrote:
>
>
>
> The docs _are_ in subversion, but in .tex format. The html is included
> in the distribution tar file for convenience, but I don't think it'd
> make sense to have both tex and html in svn.
Yes, I know the docs are in subversion. I was thinking of the html + pdf
stuff. But you are right, no need for a copy of these in the repository,
since they are in effect compiled from the source.
>
>
> I think that generating the docs is the trickiest part of making the
> release tarball, so you might as well just do the whole thing :-) Or I
> could do it, but I'd really sleep better knowing that I am not alone
> able to create a tarball.
Can do. Your earlier suggestion of putting the release instructions in a
separate file makes sense. I had looked in Doc/Makefile when trying to
generate the docs, but had not read all the way to the bottom!
>
>
> The generated psp.c is there just in case you don't have flex
> (especially because a specific version of flex is required). I guess
> it's similar to ./configure - in theory there is no need to keep it
> since it is autogenerated from configure.in, but most projects do it
> anyway...
I think it's nice to include both ./configure and psp_parser.c so that
people don't need to track down the proper version of flex and autoconf.
Regards,
Jim
| |
| Jim Gallacher 2005-06-08, 2:46 am |
| Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy wrote:
>
> On Tue, 7 Jun 2005, Nicolas Lehuen wrote:
>
>
>
> Updating the site is trivial, I can do it, that's the last thing to
> worry about. Releasing a new version is a bit more complicated.
Maybe we could have a svn branch for the website? Then it's even more
trivial for you to update.
> The instructions for making the actual tgz file are at the bottom of
> Doc/Makefile file. I have no idea why I decided to stick them there,
> perhaps it's better to create a separate file called
> Doc/release-instructions.txt or something.
I can do this. Doc/release-instructions.txt seems like a good choice.
> The instructions were written with CVS in mind so we'll need to figure
> out the SVN counterparts of the required commands.
I took a quick look and there is nothing tricky there. Biggest
difference is svn copy is used instead of cvs tag. I'll make the changes
when I split the release instructions into a new file.
> You'll definitely need to be on a unix machine of some sort that has
> TeTeX installed to produce the documentation, it's actually pretty easy.
I've had good success in generating the docs. The only trick is editing
the Makefile to point to the Python src directory.
> This being a somewhat major release, I think we should perhaps tag it
> 3.2.0-rc1 (to be followed by rc2, etc).
Agreed.
> Once the tgz file is ready we will need to collect votes on the list to
> make sure it actually works. Once it's been tested anough by the folks
> on the list (we need 4 or more I think) enough votes are collected, it
> can be released on the apache site and formally announced.
Just so I understand, is this voting on mod_python or python-dev list?
Regards,
Jim
| |
| Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy 2005-06-08, 7:45 am |
|
On Wed, 8 Jun 2005, Jim Gallacher wrote:
>
> Just so I understand, is this voting on mod_python or python-dev list?
python-dev
|
|
|
|
|