>> It would mean "use logging.staged.apache.org (the ~), but generate the >> content to the subfolder /log4j". >> I left out the magic /content folder since it was a given. This magic folder >> appears to be the problem that I raised with moving the main site to >> logging, at least, that's what I understood from infra: because of the bug, >> we would generate to /output, which confused the server. > > Yes. I can see how this would confuse it. When you changed the main > site to use output instead of content you essentially deleted the > content directory. So then the sub-project web sites had nowhere to > live. We would have had to change all the sub-projects to switch to > using output as well to fix it.
Yes, that is what I was told too. Meanwhile, my fix worked and even Jekyll works with content now. However, the staging server seems to be in a bad "state", that's why I asked infra to help and maybe clean it. Once they do this, everything is back to normal, which is currently my goal. I really would love to have a working Jekyll site now, with all the news we have coming in. Piotrs proposal is a different thing to me, and I don't have an opinion about this yet. In the end, I agree with you and Piotr as well that we should keep the existing URLs for the next 30 years or so
