Re: [CentOS-docs] Regarding Static website generator [GSOC Docs-toolchain]
On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 11:30:01AM +0530, kunaal jain wrote: Hi, I just wanted to mail community first and get the discussion started, but I should have written details first. The main aim behind this project is to facilitate contributors, so the site generator should be such that, it doesn't complicate the workflow. Another constraint is that the site generator should require minimal human effort, as we plan to build the site continuously through CI, so the new content should automatically be indexed, added to navigation panels, content directory etc. Coming to existing site generators, we looked at Jekyll, Hugo and Mkdocs. Hugo - very flexible, great tool but complicated. User needs hugo installed to contribute. Docker uses this, switching from mkdocs. Mkdocs - Not very flexible, but very friendly. User needs to create doc in mardown, add the link in another file and done! Jekyll -- very blog specific, which we don't require. What do you think about it? There is also Nikola for static content generator, relies on the rest syntax and can be themed. Pierre ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] Regarding Static website generator [GSOC Docs-toolchain]
Hi, I just wanted to mail community first and get the discussion started, but I should have written details first. The main aim behind this project is to facilitate contributors, so the site generator should be such that, it doesn't complicate the workflow. Another constraint is that the site generator should require minimal human effort, as we plan to build the site continuously through CI, so the new content should automatically be indexed, added to navigation panels, content directory etc. Coming to existing site generators, we looked at Jekyll, Hugo and Mkdocs. Hugo - very flexible, great tool but complicated. User needs hugo installed to contribute. Docker uses this, switching from mkdocs. Mkdocs - Not very flexible, but very friendly. User needs to create doc in mardown, add the link in another file and done! Jekyll -- very blog specific, which we don't require. What do you think about it? On 28-Jul-2015 8:52 AM, Sankarshan Mukhopadhyay sankarshan.mukhopadh...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 8:47 AM, kunaal jain kunaa...@gmail.com wrote: Lei and I have been working on the project, based on community input. We have implemented two way sync between github and pagure as suggest by many. Now we want build the site and display it to user. There are number of options mkdocs, hugo(docker uses it now) etc. There are pros and cons to each site generator. To use hugo, we need the user to have hugo installed too, and than he needs to run hugo command to create a new file, which is big con. Mkdocs is great too, but little inflexible we found. You would probably have to do better than just list one reason a piece. Any suggestions on which tool to use? A good part of this decision is hinged on what are the design considerations you have in place. More importantly, since you'll be developing this, what are your thoughts? -- sankarshan mukhopadhyay https://about.me/sankarshan.mukhopadhyay ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] Regarding Static website generator [GSOC Docs-toolchain]
Hi Kunaal, You might want to give time to evaluate Pelican as well. Regards. -HW On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 11:17 AM, kunaal jain kunaa...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, Lei and I have been working on the project, based on community input. We have implemented two way sync between github and pagure as suggest by many. Now we want build the site and display it to user. There are number of options mkdocs, hugo(docker uses it now) etc. There are pros and cons to each site generator. To use hugo, we need the user to have hugo installed too, and than he needs to run hugo command to create a new file, which is big con. Mkdocs is great too, but little inflexible we found. Any suggestions on which tool to use? Once we are done with this, we will release a prototype for the community to test. -- Regards, Kunaal Jain ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs -- -- Romar Micabalo (aka 'hardwyrd') SysAdmin / Consultant / Linux FOSS Evangelist http://www.about.me/rmr.micabalo - Penguin, penguin, and more penguin ! ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] Regarding Static website generator [GSOC Docs-toolchain]
On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 8:47 AM, kunaal jain kunaa...@gmail.com wrote: Lei and I have been working on the project, based on community input. We have implemented two way sync between github and pagure as suggest by many. Now we want build the site and display it to user. There are number of options mkdocs, hugo(docker uses it now) etc. There are pros and cons to each site generator. To use hugo, we need the user to have hugo installed too, and than he needs to run hugo command to create a new file, which is big con. Mkdocs is great too, but little inflexible we found. You would probably have to do better than just list one reason a piece. Any suggestions on which tool to use? A good part of this decision is hinged on what are the design considerations you have in place. More importantly, since you'll be developing this, what are your thoughts? -- sankarshan mukhopadhyay https://about.me/sankarshan.mukhopadhyay ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
