- From: Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com>
- Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2014 21:41:05 +0000
- To: Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>
- Cc: spec-prod <spec-prod@w3.org>
On Tuesday, 14 January 2014 at 21:13, Philippe Le Hegaret wrote: > So, one o the items we have on the publication pipeline wishlist is the > ability to automatically copy editors drafts on www.w3.org (http://www.w3.org). > > My guess would be that we would put them under /drafts/ or /editors/. > > In order to facilitate the task of the script that would do this copy, > I'm wondering if requiring a manifest file would be acceptable. That > would avoid having to determine the dependencies between resources in > the document. > > The logic would be something like: > - Try fetch the manifest > http://www.example.com/web-yoohoo-api/manifest.txt > > - if that fails, simply fetch > http://www.example.com/web-yoohoo-api/ > and declare victory > > - if the manifest is retrieved, go through the entries one by one, fetch > them (including create subdirectories as needed), and declare victory. > > Not sure how to approach the problem of keeping it up-to-date yet. > Ideally, the editor should have nothing to do and it's done > automatically for him, but I don't imagine yet our systems pulling all > the editors draft every minute. We might be able to listen to > notifications out of github however. > > What do people think? Sounds good. Github has a pubsubhubbub support, so that can be used for pinging the w3c server for updates. > > Philippe -- Marcos Caceres
Received on Tuesday, 14 January 2014 21:41:06 UTC