HEADS-UP: cvsweb3 imported into FreeBSD www CVS

[Gabor Kovesdan]

Simon L. Nielsen schrieb:
> On 2007.03.17 09:36:59 +0100, Simon L. Nielsen wrote:
>
>   
>> I'm planning on importing cvsweb3 into FreeBSD www cvs this weekend.
>> This should hopefully get is closer to having all the CGI scripts
>> which actually work with perl > 5.0...
>>
>> Thanks to danger@ and dvl@ Freshports has been tested with cvsweb 3 so
>> freshports shouldn't be broken by the upgrade.
>>     
>
> CVSweb has now been upgraded and www.FreeBSD.org has been switched to
> use perl 5.8.  If anyone see any problems please poke me and/or this
> mailing list.
>
> Just FYI, we (admins@) are seriously considering upgrading the current
> www.FreeBSD.org to FreeBSD 6, so it's quite possible www will have
> some downtime at some point, but it hasn't finally decided yet.
> Upgrading CVSweb was (hopefully) the last showstopper for doing this
> upgrade.
>
>   
The current tidy in ports tree is going to mess up everything if we will 
have that one upgraded as well. The current problems, that I have found 
so far:
1, New tidy handles the charset weirdly.
2, Specific versions of tidy are incompatible with each other, they have 
a bit different copmmand line options. etc.
(Both of the former issues can be reproduced by a local build.)
3, Tidy is to make pages valid, but actually it makes our ones invalid. 
Easy to see:
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.freebsd.org%2Fabout.html
4, Running tidy is almost useless at all, since the pages should be 
valid without it, we just have to substitute our custom DOCTYPE in the 
output to be valid XHTML. This can be done easily with sed or Perl. Sed 
would be more trivial, but Perl seemed to be faster when I tried that. 
If we choose this way, we have to decide which one to choose.

I've already planned working this out, since I had so much headache with 
Hungarian webpages vs. tidy that I'm very angry with it. If you have any 
comments, please let me know.

Regards,
Gabor