[ocaml-infra] staging site for ocaml.org

Ashish Agarwal agarwal1975 at gmail.com
Tue Jun 4 15:35:27 BST 2013

I see, so you do want to avoid compilation entirely. That would be nice,
but that'll be harder to provide and I'm not sure it's worth it. Most
people willing to commit a change to ocaml.org probably have OCaml
installed. They might not have a few dependencies like Weberizer and
ocamlrss, but installing those just takes a few seconds. I can see this
still deterring people who want to make small contributions, e.g. fixing a
spelling error. However, then you probably don't care to share a compiled
dev version of the site. That'll only be useful if you're making larger
design changes.

On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 4:24 PM, Martin Keegan <martin at no.ucant.org> wrote:

> On Tue, 4 Jun 2013, Anil Madhavapeddy wrote:
> > If compiling a dev version of the site is really so onerous, we could
> > make it one of the staging tasks in the OCamlot bot to compile and push
> > to a staging site.
> It's not onerous for me - but it is certainly more onerous than a site
> which is pure markdown and which just needs to be pushed, as the markdown
> compile is done on the post-receive hook server-side.
> > It doesn't seem too hard to just run a one-off OPAM installation though.
> Not hard at all, given that it's just cut-n-paste into the shell, but it
> took 25 minutes to download and compile all the bits.
> This is probably too minor a point for us all to be discussing in such
> detail! :)
> Mk
> --
> Martin Keegan, @mk270, +44 7779 296469, http://mk.ucant.org/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ocaml.org/pipermail/infrastructure/attachments/20130604/06b6849c/attachment.html>

More information about the Infrastructure mailing list