[forge-dev] Forge website domain (DISCUSS)

[Paul Bakker]

Actually I wonder if it should be a goal to not work with git directly. Assuming that most plugin authors use github anyway, it makes sense to re-use that as much as possible. I think we should make the repo as easy to use for end-users, but they are not the same as plugin authors. For example, if the github repo already contains a README with a getting started guide, it would be bad if you would have to copy this to the plugin repo. Why not just use the README directly? If we decide that plugin authors just use git to register their plugin to the repo, we can built the UI for browsing/searching plugins in JavaScript and just host it as part of the website. This keeps everything simpler :-)

Paul

On Apr 26, 2012, at 16:53 , Lincoln Baxter, III wrote:

> The plugin repository is a place where authors can, online, without interacting with Git directly, add their plugin, a description, how to install/get started, and basic usage of the plugin. It's a webapp that runs on top of the repo git repository. It's searchable, and much like this: http://grails.org/plugins/
> 
> ~Lincoln
> 
> On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 9:43 AM, Rodney Russ <rruss at redhat.com> wrote:
> 
> ----- "Max Rydahl Andersen" <max.andersen at redhat.com> wrote:
> 
> > >> * jboss.org/forge -> this can be easily got. However we cannot
> > have
> > >> all the services that we need (like hosting our plugin repository
> > for
> > >> example). We should stick to the ones offered by the jboss.org
> > server
> > >
> > > -1 if we have limitations
> >
> > What does hosting plugin repo require ?
> >
> > I thought the repo was just a static file that would be regenerated
> > from time to time ?
> 
> >From conversations with Lincoln, the repository would be more dynamic (e.g. web app) than static.  I'll let Lincoln list the details.  The other item we discussed was the URL's themselves as
> 
> forge.jboss.org/plugins would be preferred over
> jboss.org/forge/plugins
> 
> but that specifically is an aesthetic issue more than a technical one
> 
> >
> > Would a reverse proxy setup be sufficient ?
> >
> > i.e. jboss.org/forge/repo redirected to some openshift hosted setup ?
> >
> > I don't think jboss.org guys would reject that upfront if they get
> > asked.
> >
> > Depends of course of what IT etc. says and how the setup works - i.e.
> > I got such setup for jboss central feeds to feedburner and the only
> > challenge
> > been that they only allow proxy redirect to specific set of IP's but
> > that shouldn't
> > be a a big problem for this should it ?
> >
> > >> * forge.jboss.org -> we can use this domain name in all kinds of
> > cloud
> > >> solutions (like Openshift). There we will be in power to choose
> > the
> > >> web site technology
> > >
> > > +1
> >
> > I got tools.jboss.org setup, but that just goes to jboss.org/tools and
> > just because
> > this was asked for long before they started using: issues.jboss.org,
> > community.jboss.org, source.jboss.org etc.
> >
> > forge.jboss.org falls a bit outside of this so not sure how that fits,
> > but worth asking jboss.org guys about.
> >
> > /max
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > forge-dev mailing list
> > forge-dev at lists.jboss.org
> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
> _______________________________________________
> forge-dev mailing list
> forge-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Lincoln Baxter, III
> http://ocpsoft.org
> "Simpler is better."
> _______________________________________________
> forge-dev mailing list
> forge-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/forge-dev/attachments/20120426/e11f84fb/attachment-0001.html