kou commented on pull request #94: URL: https://github.com/apache/arrow-site/pull/94#issuecomment-775603425
Yes. But this may be overkill because this also includes Ruby 3.1 (this is not released yet. I'm building it from Git repository.) support. If we like a small diff, adding `gem "webrick"` to `Gemfile` will be enough. jekyll-assets depends on Nokogiri (an XML parser library for Ruby). It doesn't work with Ruby 3.1. (It's a Bundler's (package manager for Ruby) problem not Nokogiri.) jekyll-assets isn't maintained well and we can drop jekyll-assets dependency by upgrading Jekyll to 4 from 3. Jekyll 4 has built-in SCSS support. This pull request includes Jekyll upgrade. And this pull request also changes CSS/JavaScript management method to webpack from RubyGems. Should we split this pull request to 1) just supporting Ruby 3.0 and 2) upgrading Jekyll to remove jekyll-assets dependency? ---------------------------------------------------------------- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected]
