Re: More Worg build workflow

[Ihor Radchenko <yantar92@gmail.com>]

Tim Cross <theophilusx@gmail.com> writes:

> Based on only a few hours going through worg and Org mode's support for
> generating static web content, there are 3 very broad goals I would like
> to achieve 
>
> 1. Improve worg's presentation layer to 
> ...
> 2. Make it easier for users to contribute new content, updates for
>    existing content or provide feedback  
> 
> 3. Improve the build and deployment workflow. 
> ...

Sounds good.

> What I'm thinking and wanted feedback on is
>
> 1. Update the build process to be based on org publish by defining an
>    org-publish-project-alist variable.

This does make sense.

> 2. Moving as many 'global' and/or static settings to be managed within
>    the org-publish-project-alist properties and removing them from each
>    individual org file.

Also makes sense.

> Finally, as this is likely to be a sizeable piece of work, can anyone
> tell me if the FSF copyright assignment process comes into play? I know
> this is the case with org changes, but I'm hoping it isn't with worg as
> I have other constraints which prevent me from signing such an
> agreement. 

No, AFAIK. WORG is supposed to be more lax licence-wise.

I am CCing Bastien in case if there are any cavears I am not aware
about.

Best,
Ihor