Website Proposal [Was TWiki status]

Matthew Burgess matthew at
Wed Dec 8 11:20:22 PST 2004

Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
> Kevin P. Fleming wrote:
>> In that case, why even bother using rsync? If the mirror admins can be 
>> convinced to install a client-only copy of Subversion, then they can 
>> just as easily do "svn update" when needed. This has the advantage of 
>> less CPU work on belgarath, because SVN only has to check revision 
>> numbers to see if there are changes, unlike rsync which has to do more 
>> thorough checking. It also means that only diffs will be sent over the 
>> wire, instead of whole files (yes, I know rsync can do that too, but 
>> it will never work as well as Subversion, since Subversion _already_ 
>> has the diffs to send).
> A good idea, only thing with that is that they'd also then have to 
> render the books, unless we decide to keep a rendered copy of the books 
> in the website's repo as well.

So succinctly put! (I've just spent the last 5 minutes trying to compose 
a similar message!).  There's also the patches issue to consider.

The more I think about it, the more I like the idea of having rendered 
books and a *copy* of the patches in the right locations, all stored in 
the website repository itself.  Yes, it duplicates data, but it's much 
easier to mirror.  If the books change, we can simply re-render them 
into the working copy and do an automatic 'svn commit' to store the 
rendered changes in the website repo.  Next time the mirrors do an 'svn 
update' they pull the changes.  As you can hopefully see, this can all 
be automated - now that's the best kind of administration IMHO :)

I still can't get my head around quite how we'd get the patches into the 
right locations at the moment, so that'll have to wait - unless others 
here can see the bleeding obvious solution!



More information about the website mailing list