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

[Helvetix Victorinox]

Well, ugh.  Unfortunately the simple changes have non-simple ramifications
and after breaking the build entirely with these changes, I've backed
them out until more thought can be expended on a variety of installation
dependencies. Unfortunately, the last checkin may have nuked the main
news.inc on mmmaybe. If so, I can probably recover it.

The current build works.

You folks seem to have a goal in mind and it's extremely good to finally
see the push toward "shipping" the web-site (especially since I had given
up on it some months ago).

Since I am not privy to the discussions about the site anymore, I'm not
able to see or understand the over-arching direction and design.  As a
result I cannot really participate and contribute in a holistic way.
Instead, I get to stab at little problems like 'The "chmod 755" should
be removed ...' (Like, "Duh!")  Working this way makes the edit->compile->test
cycle extremely long.  Sort of like playing a chess game through the post.

You folks are doing fine, and you certainly don't need me as a text-editor
with an email interface.  So rather than continue to not understand and
just add length to the development cycles, I'm going to step off now.

Of course I'm happy to answer questions, coach, and help as I can, but
I am expecting that someone else will take over the Makefile(s), the Python
code and so forth.  There are no "turf" issues.

This is a good opportunity for someone who wants to take on some working
code and progress with it reshaping it however they want.  It's been
written with exactly this scenario in mind, so the code is readable, but
sometimes balanced with performance and/or the needs of expediency.

Helvetix

On Thu, Sep 11, 2003 at 11:36:48AM +0200, Raphaël Quinet wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Sep 2003 19:59:38 -0700, Helvetix Victorinox <helvetix@mysterious.org> wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 10, 2003 at 09:50:08AM +0200, Raphaël Quinet wrote:
> > > So please, pretty please, with sugar on top ;-), could you:
> > > - add the SSI preprocessor for all .htrw files
> > 
> > This has been in place a for a while now.
> 
> Errr...  Unfortunately not.  I have the current CVS version of the
> Makefile and after a "make clean" followed by "make DocumentRoot=...",
> I still got all html files with the SSI <!--#include ...--> stuff, so
> I cannot use them for testing.
> 
> Just to be sure, I checked the rules in the Makefile for the *.htrw
> files and I see this:
> 
> # how to make an html from a .htrw file
> %.html: %.htrw
>         programmatic/tools/rewrite_attrs -d admin/gimp-web-urls  $< > $@
>         chmod 755 $@
> 
> The "chmod 755" should be removed because the files should not be
> executable (they will not contain any SSI statements) and there should
> be a call to the ssi-pp script somewhere, although I don't know if it
> should come before or after rewrite-attrs.  By the way, wouldn't it be
> easier to merge both scripts if they will always be used together?
> That would make the Makefile simpler and would remove the need for
> intermediate files.
> 
> > > - rename the .ssi files to .htrw
> > 
> > ok
> > 
> > > - remove all rules related to .ssi files, to simplify the Makefile?
> > 
> > ok
> 
> Would it be possible for you to do that today?
> 
> > I'd like to demonstrate a different approach to making the top-level
> > index.html which doesn't require a make or a reinstall.  I'll put it
> > together soon.
> 
> I don't think that it matters much.  There are other dynamic files
> that I would like to add later and they will also require a "make"
> followed by "make install" because some include files will be
> affected.  I am thinking about the list of mirrors and the latest
> ChangeLog entries, among others.  So why would you want to add a
> special case for the index page if other pages will already use the
> common mechanism?
> 
> -Raphaël
> _______________________________________________
> Gimp-web mailing list
> Gimp-web@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu
> http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-web