1. Move the website to people.a.o: /www/mahout.apache.org.  Update the site to reflect our new status and set up the Who We are, etc.  Robin, any word on the new skin for Mahout?

2. Update the Lucene TLP site.  We should put Mahout under the related projects item and also put a news item there.

3. Move SVN.  Let's schedule this.  I will do the move.  How about tomorrow at 8 AM EDT?  This will mean moving the existing tree and leaving a placeholder in the old place to point people to the new place.

4. Let the world know.

-Grant

On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 8:46 AM, Grant Ingersoll <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:

>
> 3. Move SVN.  Let's schedule this.  I will do the move.  How about tomorrow
> at 8 AM EDT?  This will mean moving the existing tree and leaving a
> placeholder in the old place to point people to the new place.
>

 It doesn't appear that https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/mahout exists, is
this something we need to do / can do ourselves or do we need to wait for
infra on this?

On May 11, 2010, at 8:49 AM, Drew Farris wrote:

> On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 8:46 AM, Grant Ingersoll <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>
>>
>> 3. Move SVN.  Let's schedule this.  I will do the move.  How about tomorrow
>> at 8 AM EDT?  This will mean moving the existing tree and leaving a
>> placeholder in the old place to point people to the new place.
>>
>
> It doesn't appear that https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/mahout exists, is
> this something we need to do / can do ourselves or do we need to wait for
> infra on this?

It will exist once I make the move tomorrow AM.  I've setup SVN karma for it already.

On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 6:16 PM, Grant Ingersoll <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:

> 1. Move the website to people.a.o: /www/mahout.apache.org.  Update the
> site to reflect our new status and set up the Who We are, etc.  Robin, any
> word on the new skin for Mahout?
>
I am confused. I thought we  are going to use the same confluence install as
wiki, how will it be then.  mahout.apache.org will have a html redirect to
https://cwiki.apache.org/MAHOUT ?

4. Also need to add .htaccess redirection from lucene.apache.org/mahout to
mahout.apache.org

5. let the world know

On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 8:56 AM, Robin Anil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>
> > 1. Move the website to people.a.o: /www/mahout.apache.org.  Update the
> > site to reflect our new status and set up the Who We are, etc.  Robin,
> any
> > word on the new skin for Mahout?
> >
> I am confused. I thought we  are going to use the same confluence install
> as
> wiki, how will it be then.  mahout.apache.org will have a html redirect to
> https://cwiki.apache.org/MAHOUT ?
>

I thought we were going to do a single static front page that had links into
the confluence wiki -- same structure as http://ofbiz.apache.org/

On May 11, 2010, at 8:56 AM, Robin Anil wrote:

> On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 6:16 PM, Grant Ingersoll <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>
>> 1. Move the website to people.a.o: /www/mahout.apache.org.  Update the
>> site to reflect our new status and set up the Who We are, etc.  Robin, any
>> word on the new skin for Mahout?
>>
> I am confused. I thought we  are going to use the same confluence install as
> wiki, how will it be then.  mahout.apache.org will have a html redirect to
> https://cwiki.apache.org/MAHOUT ?

I think we need a static landing page still, no?  I suppose we could just do a redirect, too.  Can we make the CWiki look nice?
>
> 4. Also need to add .htaccess redirection from lucene.apache.org/mahout to
> mahout.apache.org
>

+1.  I can do that.

>
>
>
> I think we need a static landing page still, no?  I suppose we could just
> do a redirect, too.  Can we make the CWiki look nice?
>
>
> I was hoping for the same, I have seen some apache projects do that. Would
be better to keep things dynamic. On the other hand making single landing
page is easier for me and faster to do before TLP is announced. Confluence
modding will take its time as fancy plugins needs some exploration on my
part.
I will put up a landing page tonight. In the long term, having a CWIKI
backed home page would make things easier. On the negative side, its might
get hacked and the home page might vandalized. So pros and cons, but static
page for now.
Robin

On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 9:13 AM, Robin Anil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>
> > I was hoping for the same, I have seen some apache projects do that.
> Would
> be better to keep things dynamic. On the other hand making single landing
> page is easier for me and faster to do before TLP is announced. Confluence
> modding will take its time as fancy plugins needs some exploration on my
> part.
> I will put up a landing page tonight. In the long term, having a CWIKI
> backed home page would make things easier. On the negative side, its might
> get hacked and the home page might vandalized. So pros and cons, but static
> page for now.
Just had a though: what about release javadoc, reports and all that? I
assume this would get generated by the maven site plugin or the javadoc
plugin and also pushed to the static site?

Linked from the homepage or the wiki?

Drew

As far as javadoc is concerned, I think that Isabel had some stuff set
up on the pattern of 'run the site plugin, check the results into svn,
always populate p.a.o:/www from svn'. Or I'm mixing this up with some
other Apache project I had to release a week or two ago.

If we want to have both the current release and the current snapshot
javadoc available, we have more doing to do.

I personally am not in favor of checking in generated content like the
site plugin output, I'd rather come up with some way to just run
site:deploy to p.a.o and have it be linked to by the more static
content.

In general, I am not too impressed with the site plugin for things
like mahout; we might want to stop using it and cook up some other way
to deploy javadoc.

Grant, just to be tiresome, I'll remind you that relocating the
existing mahout svn root down a directory level will reduce the effort
level of the later introductions of subprojects, sandboxes, etc.
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 8:46 AM, Grant Ingersoll <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 1. Move the website to people.a.o: /www/mahout.apache.org.  Update the site to reflect our new status and set up the Who We are, etc.  Robin, any word on the new skin for Mahout?
>
> 2. Update the Lucene TLP site.  We should put Mahout under the related projects item and also put a news item there.
>
> 3. Move SVN.  Let's schedule this.  I will do the move.  How about tomorrow at 8 AM EDT?  This will mean moving the existing tree and leaving a placeholder in the old place to point people to the new place.
>
> 4. Let the world know.
>
> -Grant

On May 11, 2010, at 9:20 AM, Benson Margulies wrote:

> Grant, just to be tiresome, I'll remind you that relocating the
> existing mahout svn root down a directory level will reduce the effort
> level of the later introductions of subprojects, sandboxes, etc.

What's the structure that you propose?

We have now:
/mahout
/trunk
/tags/
/branches
/pmc

Two alternatives.

One, ignore me. We'll end up like CXF, which looks like:

cxf/
  trunk
  tags
  branches
  sandboxes
  dosgi
  web
  osgi

in other words, the subproject top-levels and such are just sitting
there next to the main project's trunk/tag/branches. That gave me an
itch, thus ....
Two, which was my original idea:

  mahout/
    code/
      mahout/
        trunk,tags,branches
      collections/
         trunk,tag,branches
      something-else-next-week/
         trunk,tag,branches
    sandboxes
    web

So the current top would become repos/mahout/code/mahout

On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 9:22 AM, Grant Ingersoll <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On May 11, 2010, at 9:20 AM, Benson Margulies wrote:
>
>> Grant, just to be tiresome, I'll remind you that relocating the
>> existing mahout svn root down a directory level will reduce the effort
>> level of the later introductions of subprojects, sandboxes, etc.
>
> What's the structure that you propose?
>
> We have now:
> /mahout
>        /trunk
>        /tags/
>        /branches
>        /pmc
>
>
>
>

On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 7:00 PM, Benson Margulies <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:

> Two alternatives.
>
> One, ignore me. We'll end up like CXF, which looks like:
>
> cxf/
>  trunk
>  tags
>  branches
>  sandboxes
>  dosgi
>  web
>  osgi
>
> in other words, the subproject top-levels and such are just sitting
> there next to the main project's trunk/tag/branches. That gave me an
> itch, thus ....
>
>
> Two, which was my original idea:
>
>  mahout/
>    code/
>      java?/
>        trunk,tags,branches
>      collections/
>         trunk,tag,branches
>      something-else-next-week/
>         trunk,tag,branches
>    sandboxes
>    web
>
> So the current top would become repos/mahout/code/java ?
>
>
>
> On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 9:22 AM, Grant Ingersoll <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> > On May 11, 2010, at 9:20 AM, Benson Margulies wrote:
> >
> >> Grant, just to be tiresome, I'll remind you that relocating the
> >> existing mahout svn root down a directory level will reduce the effort
> >> level of the later introductions of subprojects, sandboxes, etc.
> >
> > What's the structure that you propose?
> >
> > We have now:
> > /mahout
> >        /trunk
> >        /tags/
> >        /branches
> >        /pmc
> >
> >
> >
> >
>

I like some things about this, dislike others.

One thing I don't like is the code directory.  Is it necessary?  Or is this
just as good:

mahout/
   ?main-project?/
       trunk, tags, branches
   collections/
       trunk, tags, branches
   something-else-next-week
       trunk, tags, branches
   sand-boxes
   web

I don't know a good name for main-project.  I hate calling it mahout (don't
repeat), but can't come up with a better name.

On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 6:32 AM, Robin Anil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> > Two, which was my original idea:
> >
> >  mahout/
> >    code/
> >      java?/
> >        trunk,tags,branches
> >      collections/
> >         trunk,tag,branches
> >      something-else-next-week/
> >         trunk,tag,branches
> >    sandboxes
> >    web
>

java ? like in lucene ?
On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 12:45 AM, Ted Dunning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> I like some things about this, dislike others.
>
> One thing I don't like is the code directory.  Is it necessary?  Or is this
> just as good:
>
> mahout/
>   ?main-project?/
>       trunk, tags, branches
>   collections/
>       trunk, tags, branches
>   something-else-next-week
>       trunk, tags, branches
>   sand-boxes
>   web
>
> I don't know a good name for main-project.  I hate calling it mahout (don't
> repeat), but can't come up with a better name.
>
> On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 6:32 AM, Robin Anil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > Two, which was my original idea:
> > >
> > >  mahout/
> > >    code/
> > >      java?/
> > >        trunk,tags,branches
> > >      collections/
> > >         trunk,tag,branches
> > >      something-else-next-week/
> > >         trunk,tag,branches
> > >    sandboxes
> > >    web
> >
>

I hate to put the cart before the horse.  I vote for leaving as is.  Moving in SVN is trivial, let's do it when the time arises.

-Grant

On May 11, 2010, at 3:20 PM, Robin Anil wrote:

> java ? like in lucene ?
>
>
> On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 12:45 AM, Ted Dunning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> I like some things about this, dislike others.
>>
>> One thing I don't like is the code directory.  Is it necessary?  Or is this
>> just as good:
>>
>> mahout/
>>  ?main-project?/
>>      trunk, tags, branches
>>  collections/
>>      trunk, tags, branches
>>  something-else-next-week
>>      trunk, tags, branches
>>  sand-boxes
>>  web
>>
>> I don't know a good name for main-project.  I hate calling it mahout (don't
>> repeat), but can't come up with a better name.
>>
>> On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 6:32 AM, Robin Anil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>>> Two, which was my original idea:
>>>>
>>>> mahout/
>>>>   code/
>>>>     java?/
>>>>       trunk,tags,branches
>>>>     collections/
>>>>        trunk,tag,branches
>>>>     something-else-next-week/
>>>>        trunk,tag,branches
>>>>   sandboxes
>>>>   web
>>>
>>

I generally don't like deep file hierarchies as they tend to bury
things, but since we do have one subproject already I think an
organization like Two has some long-term advantages.
On 5/11/10 6:30 AM, Benson Margulies wrote:
> Two alternatives.
>
> One, ignore me. We'll end up like CXF, which looks like:
>
> cxf/
>    trunk
>    tags
>    branches
>    sandboxes
>    dosgi
>    web
>    osgi
>
> in other words, the subproject top-levels and such are just sitting
> there next to the main project's trunk/tag/branches. That gave me an
> itch, thus ....
>
>
> Two, which was my original idea:
>
>    mahout/
>      code/
>        mahout/
>          trunk,tags,branches
>        collections/
>           trunk,tag,branches
>        something-else-next-week/
>           trunk,tag,branches
>      sandboxes
>      web
>
> So the current top would become repos/mahout/code/mahout
>
>
>
> On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 9:22 AM, Grant Ingersoll<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  wrote:
>    
>> On May 11, 2010, at 9:20 AM, Benson Margulies wrote:
>>
>>      
>>> Grant, just to be tiresome, I'll remind you that relocating the
>>> existing mahout svn root down a directory level will reduce the effort
>>> level of the later introductions of subprojects, sandboxes, etc.
>>>        
>> What's the structure that you propose?
>>
>> We have now:
>> /mahout
>>         /trunk
>>         /tags/
>>         /branches
>>         /pmc
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>      
>

Do we have svn yet?

# svn co http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/mahout/trunk mahout
svn: URL 'http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/mahout/trunk' doesn't exist

On 5/11/10 6:22 AM, Grant Ingersoll wrote:
> On May 11, 2010, at 9:20 AM, Benson Margulies wrote:
>
>    
>> Grant, just to be tiresome, I'll remind you that relocating the
>> existing mahout svn root down a directory level will reduce the effort
>> level of the later introductions of subprojects, sandboxes, etc.
>>      
> What's the structure that you propose?
>
> We have now:
> /mahout
> /trunk
> /tags/
> /branches
> /pmc
>
>
>
>
>

No, I said I would do it in the morning at a scheduled time to synchronize the process.

On May 11, 2010, at 4:24 PM, Jeff Eastman wrote:

> Do we have svn yet?
>
> # svn co http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/mahout/trunk mahout
> svn: URL 'http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/mahout/trunk' doesn't exist
>
> On 5/11/10 6:22 AM, Grant Ingersoll wrote:
>> On May 11, 2010, at 9:20 AM, Benson Margulies wrote:
>>
>>  
>>> Grant, just to be tiresome, I'll remind you that relocating the
>>> existing mahout svn root down a directory level will reduce the effort
>>> level of the later introductions of subprojects, sandboxes, etc.
>>>    
>> What's the structure that you propose?
>>
>> We have now:
>> /mahout
>> /trunk
>> /tags/
>> /branches
>> /pmc
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>  
>