LOVE the style and of course GH pages and the work there is superior to the CMS.
Let’s explore this..great start. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Chris Mattmann, Ph.D. Chief Architect Instrument Software and Science Data Systems Section (398) NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA Office: 168-519, Mailstop: 168-527 Email: [email protected] WWW: http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Director, Information Retrieval and Data Science Group (IRDS) Adjunct Associate Professor, Computer Science Department University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA WWW: http://irds.usc.edu/ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ On 4/5/16, 7:06 PM, "Tom Barber" <[email protected]> wrote: >Okay, spent an hour hacking around ideas tonight, just to get a feel for >things. > >http://buggtb.github.io/oodt-website/ > >I've only messed around with a frontpage and basic blog listing. You can >see what i'm trying to do in breaking it up a bunch, I still want to do >make the text easier to digest, its all a bit "wordy" for a front page, but >broken up with an architecture diagram I stole from one of Chris' slides >gives non users a quick visual representation of what it is. > >Of course I could have done that in CMS, but I can assure you it was 100 >times quicker locally and pushing the changes up, but as I discussed the >other day that's not the whole reason, as I was wanting something that >makes it easier for non technical users to contribute news and blog stuff >to. > >https://raw.githubusercontent.com/buggtb/oodt-website/master/_posts/2016-01-04-oodt-011-released.md > > >They are pretty straightforward, and as we found the other day, there is a >github based editor for these things for those who don't want to mess with >markdown. You can also submit blog posts in html and they'll be rendered >just fine. > >I'm not trying to undo the work that was done during the rewrite and Chris >mentioned his affection for SK's old site, I liked it to, my only gripe >with that was the inability for easy fixes from users! Which is resolved >sorta with CMS but personally I think its even easier for users with a >github fork -> PR setup, which is basically what would happen with >gitsubpub. > >https://github.com/buggtb/oodt-website > >I'll probably leave it at that for a while, I just wanted to play with some >stuff and share it back. > >Tom > >On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 10:02 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (3980) < >[email protected]> wrote: > >> Understood, OK Tom. >> >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> Chris Mattmann, Ph.D. >> Chief Architect >> Instrument Software and Science Data Systems Section (398) >> NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA >> Office: 168-519, Mailstop: 168-527 >> Email: [email protected] >> WWW: http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/ >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> Director, Information Retrieval and Data Science Group (IRDS) >> Adjunct Associate Professor, Computer Science Department >> University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA >> WWW: http://irds.usc.edu/ >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On 4/5/16, 12:10 PM, "Tom Barber" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >Yeah, I'm not suggesting we switch any time soon. >> > >> >My viewpoint is thus: we can do a better job with content, look and feel >> >and the maintenance side. >> > >> >Personally, I find the CMS hard to use, maybe its just me, who knows. So, >> >my suggestion is purely do some POC work to come up with what may, or may >> >not be a better solution. If the workflow and tech is acceptable, then >> >build out the site in the new tech, it can be demoed on GH pages or >> >wherever in the interim, and finally, when we're happy with the content, >> >the theme and the ability to update it, then... and only then do we change >> >it. >> > >> >From my own opinion, I want to put some more free time into improving the >> >site, but I feel that it would be a much quicker and more efficient >> process >> >if the stuff wasn't inside CMS, that is all. >> > >> >Tom >> > >> >On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 2:27 PM, Chris Mattmann <[email protected]> >> >wrote: >> > >> >> Tom, my comment here is that we tried to do the exact >> >> same thing in Summer 2014 on XDATA. Just note that >> >> “dummy site” is now what we have in our operational >> >> site for Apache OODT. I think we have just only recently >> >> come to a point where it’s more stable (we don’t have >> >> people like Sebb coming externally saying our links don’t >> >> work). >> >> >> >> Now you are proposing to change the site again, which >> >> design wise is fine by me (though shows how much I know >> >> since I liked SK’s old site even - and the new site started >> >> by the next generation also looks nice too). However, >> >> stability wise it’s not fine by me unless *the entire site* >> >> is migrated, and until we run a link checker against it >> >> long before turning on the switch to move over to it. >> >> >> >> No one is clamoring for a website redesign - it’s mostly >> >> been discussion led by you and commented on by Val, and >> >> Lewis. >> >> >> >> My 2c. >> >> >> >> Cheers, >> >> Chris >> >> >> >> — >> >> Chris Mattmann >> >> [email protected] >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On 4/5/16, 8:55 AM, "Tom Barber" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >> >Okay here's what I propose. Apache CMS will be retired, not any time >> >> soon, but at some point in the medium term future. ASF Infra offer >> >> gitsubpub/svnsubpub as the standard for website publishing and we(I?) >> want >> >> something more useable for non webdevs. Thats not necessarily code free, >> >> but certainly an easy process for people to upload new content. >> >> >My suggestion is that I knock up a dummy replacement site in Jekyll, >> that >> >> migrates across a couple of the pages and some dummy blog content, and >> I'll >> >> come back and demonstrate the user publishing flow, at which point we >> can >> >> have a discussion as to whether its something we pursue, or not. >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >Sound like a plan? >> >> > >> >> >Of course in the mean time, if anyone else has any suggestions for a >> >> "dynamic" static website, speak up! >> >> > >> >> >Tom >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 10:09 AM, Tom Barber <[email protected]> >> >> wrote: >> >> > >> >> >Indeed Val >> >> >Ease of use is something I'm trying to achieve because it makes it >> easier >> >> for everyone to help maintain our resources with minimum effort. >> >> > >> >> >In Jekyll (if that was a chosen solution Markdown is entirely optional, >> >> you can just as easily publish HTML content as markdown, I just >> mentioned >> >> it as an easy barrier to get people to write blog posts, but there are a >> >> bunch of HTML generating apps on the market, of you could use the WP >> >> editor, and hit the source button and copy the content from WP to >> Jekyll, >> >> not great always the most obvious workflow, but would do the job. >> >> > >> >> >Also, not tried it, but Prose.io gives you a MD WYSIWYG editor for >> >> github, so assuming we were running the fork -> pull request model, you >> >> could edit the OODT site using Prose on Github and just push over a pull >> >> request with the changes made. >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >Prose seems to support basic formatting and inserting of images, once a >> >> website template is designed I would expect contributers to do any more >> >> anyway, unless they wanted to, content should be about writing a blog >> post >> >> of page and hitting the go button. >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >A quick google also reveals some Word to Markdown tools, I've not used >> >> them either, but I guess they would do a job. >> >> > >> >> >Tom >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 1:30 AM, Mallder, Valerie < >> >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >> > >> >> >You are absolutely right, in markdown you would be missing images. My >> >> objection to using markdown is having to learn a new language syntax for >> >> styling the text. I have no objection to having a static site. I just >> want >> >> it to be easy to use and not require that you have to spend time >> learning >> >> something new. If it takes too much time to do (because you have to >> learn >> >> some new stuff in order to do it) you may find that people will put it >> on >> >> their todo list but never end up getting to it because they are too busy >> >> working on higher priority tasks in their day jobs. I think your primary >> >> goal (when choosing what you want to do) should be to add as little >> work as >> >> possible to people's plates. That's all. If there are any WYSIWYG >> editors >> >> out there that have the option to do a "save as" to markdown format that >> >> would be optimal. But I don't know if there are any. >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >Sent with Good (www.good.com <http://www.good.com>) >> >> >________________________________ >> >> >From: Tom Barber <[email protected]> >> >> >Sent: Saturday, April 2, 2016 7:17:42 PM >> >> >To: [email protected] >> >> >Subject: Re: OODT Website Changes (Redux) >> >> > >> >> >Also, (playing devils advocate) if it's a word doc why can't you just >> copy >> >> >and paste it into a markdown file? The only major thing you'd be >> missing >> >> >is any images :) >> >> > >> >> >Another plus to a static blogging site is, if you decide it sucks in a >> few >> >> >years time, you just have some html to move somewhere else, it's >> just a >> >> >static website, if you decide WordPress sucked or infra said they'd >> host >> >> >it, then down the line changed their mind, you'd have a much bigger >> task >> >> >on your hands. >> >> > >> >> >Tom >> >> >On 3 Apr 2016 00:07, "Tom Barber" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > >> >> >> Hey Val, >> >> >> >> >> >> You can write HTML and a bunch of other stuff, but I'm trying to >> offer >> >> up >> >> >> a solution that is easy for people to deploy and develop on outside >> of >> >> the >> >> >> Apache infrastructure, and markdown, being just text is easy to >> deploy. >> >> >> Also Wordpress etc require databases and backing infra where as >> Jekyll >> >> is >> >> >> purely static HTML by the time it is deployed. >> >> >> >> >> >> I have no idea if Infra would support wordpress anyway, I doubt it, >> when >> >> >> they said they were retiring Apache CMS, it wasn't like "oh but don't >> >> worry >> >> >> folks, you can stand up a wordpress website", I could be wrong, but >> that >> >> >> was my impression. >> >> >> >> >> >> At the end of a day, creating a blog post that looks like: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> https://raw.githubusercontent.com/maciakl/Sample-Jekyll-Site/master/_posts/2012-02-10-code-snippets.markdown >> >> >> >> >> >> is much quicker than writing a bunch of HTML, but the Apache CMS is >> >> also a >> >> >> bit of a lie, because if you think you don't have to write HTML >> because >> >> its >> >> >> a CMS, you're sorely mistaken! ;) >> >> >> >> >> >> Tom >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 12:00 AM, Mallder, Valerie < >> >> >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >>> I am not familiar with Jekyll, but I disagree with using markdown. >> Why >> >> >>> must we write in any kind of markup language? That would suck. Why >> not >> >> just >> >> >>> use a better CMS? There are plenty out there. I personally develop >> >> websites >> >> >>> in Wordpress. It's free and very easy to use. You can edit posts in >> a >> >> >>> WYSIWYG editor. You can also copy-paste from a Word doc into the >> post. >> >> Just >> >> >>> my opinion. >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >>> Sent with Good (www.good.com <http://www.good.com>< >> http://www.good.com >> >> >) >> >> >>> ________________________________ >> >> >>> From: Tom Barber <[email protected]> >> >> >>> Sent: Saturday, April 2, 2016 6:45:21 PM >> >> >>> To: [email protected] >> >> >>> Subject: OODT Website Changes (Redux) >> >> >>> >> >> >>> Alright folks, >> >> >>> >> >> >>> Most peope who have been on the list for a while know we moved from >> the >> >> >>> most static of static websites to Apache CMS a while ago to allow >> for >> >> more >> >> >>> regular updating and maintenance of the website. >> >> >>> >> >> >>> Lewis then put a bunch of work into creating a template for the CMS >> >> >>> website >> >> >>> and we revamped a lot of the content, but the CMS has a bunch of >> issues >> >> >>> both in the ease of developing a website and also in maintenance so >> the >> >> >>> Infra team are retiring it. >> >> >>> >> >> >>> My personal opinion(having done some of this in my day job, and >> >> discussed >> >> >>> similar on some other ASF projects) is we migrate the website to >> >> gitsubpub >> >> >>> and Jekyll. >> >> >>> >> >> >>> This will give us the ability to easily stand up the existing >> website >> >> on >> >> >>> our own laptops, or development servers make changes and deploy >> them. >> >> Also >> >> >>> without the templating system that Apache CMS enforces upon you, >> its a >> >> >>> far >> >> >>> quicker development cycle. >> >> >>> >> >> >>> Of course we could just use standard HTML & Javascript, but part of >> the >> >> >>> reason I'd like to use Jekyll is the fact users can create content >> >> using >> >> >>> Markdown syntax instead of HTML and Javascript. Jekyll is a static >> >> >>> blogging >> >> >>> platform, so its designed for frequent updating, and as people may >> have >> >> >>> noticed I've been blogging OODT stuff on my personal blog because >> the >> >> CMS >> >> >>> is a pain to update. >> >> >>> >> >> >>> Has anyone got an opinion? It feels like we did stage one which was >> >> make >> >> >>> the website easier to update, but stage two is to make the process a >> >> lot >> >> >>> easier, and standardised. >> >> >>> >> >> >>> Cheers >> >> >>> >> >> >>> Tom >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >> >> >>
