[Gimp-web] Static pages for m.g.o

[Helvetix Victorinox]

On Tue, Sep 09, 2003 at 05:08:43PM +0200, Raphaël Quinet wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Sep 2003 07:57:23 -0700, Helvetix Victorinox <helvetix@mysterious.org> wrote:
> > 
> > On Tue, Sep 09, 2003 at 11:03:14AM +0200, Raphaël Quinet wrote:
> > > But I don't think that generating a static index.html
> > > would be a problem.  We simply have to update it when news.inc is
> > > updated.  This is a simple dependency tracking problem, so it should
> > > be solved easily by the Makefile.  If index.html depends on
> > > includes/news.inc, it will be rebuilt every time the news file is
> > > updated.
> > 
> > Well, heh, despite the seductive uses of the word "simple" I think there's
> > really nothing simple about what is proposed (apart from the description).
> 
> Well, the part about the dependencies is simple.  If you want, I can
> do that part.  I cannot see any obvious reason why including news.inc
> would be different from including the other files, but maybe there are
> hidden pitfalls in your script that I am not aware of.

I was going to start this tonight, but now I'm lost.  Sorry to be
thick-headed, but what are you proposing?

The reason why including news.inc is different from including the other
files is because news.inc changes as you manipulate the news via the web
interface.  No other files have a web interface to change them. 
Please, go try http://mmmaybe.gimp.org/admin/news/news-index.cgi?news-current
please read http://mmmaybe.gimp.org/admin/news/howto-news.html

A) Are you proposing the creation of a Makefile to create and install
   the top level index.html from constituent pieces that you describe
	 in the dependencies you mention ?

B) Are you proposing to reinstall the site each time the news is updated
   from the web interface, and having the reinstall recreate the top-level
	 index.html from all the included files as well as the file news.inc?  

Helvetix

> 
> In fact, I am considering replacing the Makefile by Makefile.in and
> using a very simple configure script to set several things correctly,
> including dependencies and the default DocumentRoot.  This would be
> easier to use than the current system that requires you to specify the
> DocumentRoot separately.  Do you want me to work on the Makefile, or
> are you already editing it?
> 
> > Nevertheless, I will devise a new way to produce the top-level index.html
> > and you folks can run with it.
> 
> Please do not add any special case for it, unless there is really no
> other way to do it (in that case, please explain why).  The news file
> is included in exactly the same way as all other files, so I don't
> understand why you would need a special case for it.  I would really
> like to limit this to some very simply dependency changes in the
> Makefile.  I am trying to simplify the build process and to make it
> easier to understand and maintain by others, so special cases should
> be avoided as much as possible.
> 
> > PS: Renaming files doesn't affect CVS in any way.  There is no health or
> > happiness issue. CVS doesn't even do renaming.  You add the new files
> > (new names) and delete the old ones.
> 
> Yes, but then it gets more difficult to get the revision history for
> these files.  Since the file extension does not matter (unless I
> missed something obvious) and all files will be processed in the same
> way, I prefer to keep the file extension that will require the least
> amount of changes.
> 
> > PPS: Renaming isn't what will make testing and maintenance more troublesome.
> > it's the new code for making the index.html file which turns into a
> > maintenance and testing problem.  More code == more maintenance.  Axiomatic.
> 
> Yes, that's why I suggest avoiding any new code.
> 
> -Raphaël
> _______________________________________________
> Gimp-web mailing list
> Gimp-web@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu
> http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-web