OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

docbook-apps message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: Re: [docbook-apps] Website build/deploy

Thanks for the detail Warren.
I hadn't realised how many assumptions I was making!
Talk about creeping requirements! Classic!

Warren Young wrote:

> Here's a start at the Makefile to drive it:


> The first two lines require GNU make on a Unix-like system.  It'll work 
> fine on OS X, or on Windows with Cygwin installed. 

I'm assuming your .dbx is a docbook XML file?
I'm likely developing on Linux, target is Windows.
I'm reluctant to even propose cygwin installation.
I know the pc support people are near paranoid about
Linux. They don't know it at all, hence find any reason
to diss it.
Both at home and on other windows systems, I've used simple
batch files to build the site. Two stage - first to generate
the layout, then to build the actual site.
  Your make file is far more general purpose though and could
be used to start a new site at any time.

> Finally, there's the 'synch' target, which ensures the 'html' target is 
> up to date, then it rsyncs the deltas up to the server.  I only show 
> three --exclude rules here, but in practice I find that I need lots of 
> them for various reasons, which is why I break them out into one per 
> line.  It makes the Makefile easier to read.

Again, rsync is a favourite here on Linux systems. Not available
to me on Windows.
I could do with something similar, but windows ftp looks most likely.

> I manage several different sites with essentially this mechanism, and 
> have since before the bubble popped.  For static sites, it works well.

For which this is a good match.

> Another advantage of using make is that a lot of GUI tools know how to 
> run it, and interpret the output.  Your XML editor of choice may be able 
> to do this, so you wouldn't have to build desktop icons to drive this.

<snark> Word? </snark>. No, seriously. For xml generation it is likely 
that another guy will write a host of Word macro's to convert to website 
files! Still a guess, but that's the only way we can think of at the 
moment. The support exists for another vocabulary, website is 
sufficiently clean we could use that. The page authors are possibly
totally non-technical.

Thanks for all the answers.
If people are interested I'll document the solution and post it to the list.


Dave Pawson

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]