In the specific case, there's two reasons:
1) It's because the Apache website exists in a mirror network and so
it's useful to have something static that you can rsync around.
2) It's because the ASF lives and dies by subversion, and there needs
to be a workflow whereby versions can be put in svn and diffed and
reverted, and all that good stuff.
In the general case, much greater scalability can be achieved by
exporting static content and serving that, rather than having to hit
the database thousands of times per second for content that only
changes, at best, a few times a day.
On Nov 6, 2009, at 15:40 , chrisjdavis wrote:
> Someone asked on IRC for more info about the static export.
>
> Apache will be using Habari to create and manage the content, not
> serve it. It will be exported as static flat html files and served
> that way. I have some ideas on how this could work, so when we have
> someone with some energy to help out with it, we'll talk.
--
Rich Bowen
rbo...@rcbowen.com
[snip]
> We still need to think about how long the code sprint should last, etc but
> right now I think we need to gauge interest and passion from the community,
> which means you!
Sounds interesting, if it happens, I'd definitely try to turn up and help.
--
Michael C. Harris, School of CS&IT, RMIT University
http://twofishcreative.com/michael/blog
IRC: michaeltwofish #habari