Moving our website to git and splitting it in two
Hi, Tom asked what was needed to get our website moved to git. Probably not much. And while we're at it we could split the repository into two parts: - things that are copied over verbatim, and - things that build stuff that make our website. Splitting this makes it easier to publish something more clean to our webservers - there is little point in putting build scripts and sources into the webroot right along the finished html files. https://people.torproject.org/~weasel/tor-web-underlay/ and https://people.torproject.org/~weasel/tor-web-web/ (add .git to clone) Should we move to this? Something different? Cheers, weasel -- | .''`. ** Debian ** Peter Palfrader | : :' : The universal http://www.palfrader.org/ | `. `' Operating System | `- http://www.debian.org/
On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 9:53 AM, Peter Palfrader <weasel@torproject.org> wrote:
Hi,
Tom asked what was needed to get our website moved to git. Probably not much.
FWIW, I have a writeup for how to migrate stuff from SVN-as-Tor-used-it to Git-as-Tor-uses-it in my "githax" repository[0]. The process needs a tiny bit of babysitting to get all the authors' names right, but that's about it. [0] https://gitweb.torproject.org/nickm/githax.git -- Nick
On Fri, 5 Apr 2013 15:53:57 +0200 Peter Palfrader <weasel@torproject.org> wrote:
Tom asked what was needed to get our website moved to git. Probably not much. And while we're at it we could split the repository into two parts: - things that are copied over verbatim, and - things that build stuff that make our website.
Is now a fine time to talk about further splitting dist and media from the content? where dist is for moving to dist.torproject.org for all downloadable software bundles, code, etc. (as in our packages). dist becomes a mirrored dir on the webservers. where media is for all videos, images, pdf, etc that are currently on the site? media.torproject.org becomes a mirrored dir on the webservers. This would make www.tpo content only, media.tpo images/video/pdfs only, dist.tpo for "products" -- Andrew http://tpo.is/contact pgp 0x6B4D6475
On 06.04.2013 14:09, Andrew Lewman wrote:
Is now a fine time to talk about further splitting dist and media from the content? where dist is for moving to dist.torproject.org for all downloadable software bundles, code, etc. (as in our packages). dist becomes a mirrored dir on the webservers.
Keep in mind that many mirrors (like ours) don't have the money (or don't want) to buy a signed wildcard certificate. You want the site to still be rsync'd easily to arbitrary locations, including /dist. Of course they can be logically separated on tpo.org, with /dist staying the "public" location of packages. I guess that is what you are suggesting. -- Moritz Bartl https://www.torservers.net/
On Sat, 06 Apr 2013, Andrew Lewman wrote:
On Fri, 5 Apr 2013 15:53:57 +0200 Peter Palfrader <weasel@torproject.org> wrote:
Tom asked what was needed to get our website moved to git. Probably not much. And while we're at it we could split the repository into two parts: - things that are copied over verbatim, and - things that build stuff that make our website.
Is now a fine time to talk about further splitting dist and media from the content?
Splitting /dist away from www, absolutely. We don't have a /media dir at this time, so I'm not certain which pieces of the website you mean exactly - there are probably a couple of thing that qualify. Right now I had shoved that all into underlay, but making that smaller seems sensible. If the underlay ends up consisting of just img, css and .htaccess we probably don't even need a seperate repository for it. As long as a make install doesn't have to manually list too many things keeping it in one www repo would be reasonable.
This would make www.tpo content only, media.tpo images/video/pdfs only, dist.tpo for "products"
Sounds good. I would want everything that is on the www vhost to be autobuilt from git. There shouldn't be any need for people to manually add stuff there. In the long run it'd be nice if we could do the same for dist: only source packages and binary releases that got automatically built from source control end up being there. But that's a long way off. Cheers, -- | .''`. ** Debian ** Peter Palfrader | : :' : The universal http://www.palfrader.org/ | `. `' Operating System | `- http://www.debian.org/
On Sábado, 6 de abril de 2013 13:09:43 Andrew Lewman wrote:
On Fri, 5 Apr 2013 15:53:57 +0200
Peter Palfrader <weasel@torproject.org> wrote:
Tom asked what was needed to get our website moved to git. Probably not much. And while we're at it we could split the
repository into two parts: - things that are copied over verbatim, and - things that build stuff that make our website.
Is now a fine time to talk about further splitting dist and media from the content?
where dist is for moving to dist.torproject.org for all downloadable software bundles, code, etc. (as in our packages). dist becomes a mirrored dir on the webservers.
where media is for all videos, images, pdf, etc that are currently on the site? media.torproject.org becomes a mirrored dir on the webservers.
This would make www.tpo content only, media.tpo images/video/pdfs only, dist.tpo for "products"
I would like to have a word about translating the webpages too. Regards Noel er Envite ------------------------- A: Because it breaks the logical flow of discussion. Q: Why is top posting bad?
On Sat, Apr 6, 2013 at 4:00 PM, Noel David Torres Taño <envite@rolamasao.org> wrote:
I would like to have a word about translating the webpages too.
We decided to drop website translations a year and a half ago: https://blog.torproject.org/blog/whither-website-translations -- Runa A. Sandvik
On Domingo, 7 de abril de 2013 20:07:33 Runa A. Sandvik wrote:
On Sat, Apr 6, 2013 at 4:00 PM, Noel David Torres Taño
<envite@rolamasao.org> wrote:
I would like to have a word about translating the webpages too.
We decided to drop website translations a year and a half ago: https://blog.torproject.org/blog/whither-website-translations
I understand the reasons mentioned there, but maybe a different approach can be used now that we have paid people for translations (and support). A tiered method may help working like this: * 1 Translations coordinator, running a git clone for translations revision and with permissions to merge into the main webserver git * 5 Translations managers, one per language, each running a git clone of the previous clone, maybe with permissions to merge into it (this may be a Translations coordinator task too). * Lot of Volunteer translators, each working in his native language and own git clone of the clone of the clone, sending updates to the corresponding Translations Manager Of course it is not up to me to decide, but to propose. Regards Noel er Envite ------------------------- A: Because it breaks the logical flow of discussion. Q: Why is top posting bad?
On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 7:21 PM, Noel David Torres Taño <envite@rolamasao.org> wrote:
On Domingo, 7 de abril de 2013 20:07:33 Runa A. Sandvik wrote:
On Sat, Apr 6, 2013 at 4:00 PM, Noel David Torres Taño
<envite@rolamasao.org> wrote:
I would like to have a word about translating the webpages too.
We decided to drop website translations a year and a half ago: https://blog.torproject.org/blog/whither-website-translations
I understand the reasons mentioned there, but maybe a different approach can be used now that we have paid people for translations (and support). A tiered method may help working like this:
True, but I worry that we will still run into issues with frequent English updates, less frequent translation updates, and translated content that would need manual edits before being included. -- Runa A. Sandvik
On Domingo, 7 de abril de 2013 20:42:16 Runa A. Sandvik wrote:
On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 7:21 PM, Noel David Torres Taño
<envite@rolamasao.org> wrote:
On Domingo, 7 de abril de 2013 20:07:33 Runa A. Sandvik wrote:
On Sat, Apr 6, 2013 at 4:00 PM, Noel David Torres Taño
<envite@rolamasao.org> wrote:
I would like to have a word about translating the webpages too.
We decided to drop website translations a year and a half ago: https://blog.torproject.org/blog/whither-website-translations
I understand the reasons mentioned there, but maybe a different approach can be used now that we have paid people for translations (and support). A tiered
method may help working like this: True, but I worry that we will still run into issues with frequent English updates, less frequent translation updates, and translated content that would need manual edits before being included.
Yes. If the webpage is setup for translation, we can give it a try, at least for spanish only, which is LTR, with myself acting in all three layers. I think it's worth a try. If it doesn't work, at least we would not have spent the time of lots of people but just one person. Regards er Envite ------------------------- A: Because it breaks the logical flow of discussion. Q: Why is top posting bad?
On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 8:05 PM, Noel David Torres Taño <envite@rolamasao.org> wrote:
On Domingo, 7 de abril de 2013 20:42:16 Runa A. Sandvik wrote:
On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 7:21 PM, Noel David Torres Taño
<envite@rolamasao.org> wrote:
On Domingo, 7 de abril de 2013 20:07:33 Runa A. Sandvik wrote:
On Sat, Apr 6, 2013 at 4:00 PM, Noel David Torres Taño
<envite@rolamasao.org> wrote:
I would like to have a word about translating the webpages too.
We decided to drop website translations a year and a half ago: https://blog.torproject.org/blog/whither-website-translations
I understand the reasons mentioned there, but maybe a different approach can be used now that we have paid people for translations (and support). A tiered
method may help working like this: True, but I worry that we will still run into issues with frequent English updates, less frequent translation updates, and translated content that would need manual edits before being included.
Yes.
If the webpage is setup for translation, we can give it a try, at least for spanish only, which is LTR, with myself acting in all three layers. I think it's worth a try. If it doesn't work, at least we would not have spent the time of lots of people but just one person.
The website is not setup for translations. The website files are .wml. Transifex does not support this format, so all files would have to be converted to .po before being translated on Transifex. Once translated, the files would have to be converted back to .wml (sometimes with manual edits to make that process complete without errors). -- Runa A. Sandvik
On Domingo, 7 de abril de 2013 21:50:55 Runa A. Sandvik wrote:
On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 8:05 PM, Noel David Torres Taño
<envite@rolamasao.org> wrote:
On Domingo, 7 de abril de 2013 20:42:16 Runa A. Sandvik wrote:
On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 7:21 PM, Noel David Torres Taño
<envite@rolamasao.org> wrote:
On Domingo, 7 de abril de 2013 20:07:33 Runa A. Sandvik wrote:
On Sat, Apr 6, 2013 at 4:00 PM, Noel David Torres Taño
<envite@rolamasao.org> wrote:
I would like to have a word about translating the webpages too.
We decided to drop website translations a year and a half ago: https://blog.torproject.org/blog/whither-website-translations
I understand the reasons mentioned there, but maybe a different approach can be used now that we have paid people for translations (and support). A tiered
method may help working like this: True, but I worry that we will still run into issues with frequent English updates, less frequent translation updates, and translated content that would need manual edits before being included.
Yes.
If the webpage is setup for translation, we can give it a try, at least for spanish only, which is LTR, with myself acting in all three layers. I think it's worth a try. If it doesn't work, at least we would not have spent the time of lots of people but just one person.
The website is not setup for translations. The website files are .wml. Transifex does not support this format, so all files would have to be converted to .po before being translated on Transifex. Once translated, the files would have to be converted back to .wml (sometimes with manual edits to make that process complete without errors).
I understand, but I'm not thinking on using Transifex necessarily. I have worked with Website Meta Language previously on the GnuPG webpages. Obviously (I repeat) it is not for me to decide, just reasoning my POV. Regards er Envite ------------------------- A: Because it breaks the logical flow of discussion. Q: Why is top posting bad?
Asking the other way around: Is there any comparable website of any comparable Open Source project, like torproject.org, which successfully relies on the community for translations? And how do they manage it?
On Domingo, 7 de abril de 2013 22:42:16 adrelanos wrote:
Asking the other way around:
Is there any comparable website of any comparable Open Source project, like torproject.org, which successfully relies on the community for translations?
Debian
And how do they manage it?
We have mailing lists for each language, on which everything (web pages, package descriptions, installer strings and more) is translated. Translations are automatically fed up to a robot http://people.debian.org/~jfs/debconf6/html/x613.html which updates the webpage or package. More info at http://www.debian.org/international/l10n Regards er Envite ------------------------- A: Because it breaks the logical flow of discussion. Q: Why is top posting bad?
participants (7)
-
adrelanos -
Andrew Lewman -
Moritz Bartl -
Nick Mathewson -
Noel David Torres Taño -
Peter Palfrader -
Runa A. Sandvik