I believe taking Brian and Robert's advice to help git detect moves (even more than you already have) will make this much more manageable. I just tried it out and squashing commits brings it to "631 files changed, 10363 insertions(+), 9945 deletions(-)" according to git, so that is more manageable than +47k - 47k. I'm not saying that a total squash is best. There may be a better way to factor the changes.
Kenn On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 8:09 PM Ahmet Altay <al...@google.com> wrote: > Nam, > > - Website looks good and looks the same as the current website. (Visually > comparing a few pages, not a deep analysis.) > - contribute.md looks good. (this is new content.) > - website/Dockerfile and website/README.md changes look good. > - I do not know what is the new version of some files, for example: > website/src/_data/authors.yml, website/src/_data/capability-matrix.yml -- > what replaces them? > > There are 887 file changes. It is not easy to review this. I wanted to go > commit by commit, but that did not help much. How about we try to organize > this review as reviewable commits. > - Changes to the mechanics (jekyll to hugo), themes, build files, website > related readmes etc. This will likely be a smaller change in number of > files. (This will likely have many completed new, and completely deleted > files. Only a few files have meaningful diffs.) > - Changes to the content. This might be a large number of files with > minimal changes. I do not think we can manually review each file, but at > least a quick review of minimal changes to each file would be good enough. > > What do you think? > > Ahmet > > On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 4:29 PM Hannah Jiang <hannahji...@google.com> > wrote: > >> Since we want to move forward with the PR, I would like to ask the >>> community to hold off changes to the current Beam website for a week, until >>> we are able to review and merge the PR. Is this acceptable to everyone? >> >> Do we have an exact date when we can push changes to the website? I have >> PRs to update documents so would like to plan ahead. >> >> On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 1:17 PM Nam Bui <nam....@polidea.com> wrote: >> >>> Hey guys, >>> >>> I tried my best to handle renamed files in Git. I have no clue why >>> GitHub doesn't show it, but finally, I made this commit [1] (thanks for >>> your idea @bhulette) so you guys can review changes with ease (there is no >>> bunch of deleted markdown files anymore :D). Also, new staged version is >>> deployed, you could check it out [2]. >>> >>> In case you are interested in translation, here is the proof of concept >>> [3] (the earth icon on the right corner is temporarily used for switching >>> languages). You can take a look at the translation guide for this PoC [4]. >>> >>> [1] >>> https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/11554/commits/b267bb360866a723ac2536f408f23de648c7cd4d >>> [2] >>> http://apache-beam-website-pull-requests.storage.googleapis.com/11554/index.html >>> [3] https://safe-relation.surge.sh/ >>> [4] >>> https://github.com/PolideaInternal/beam/blob/website-develop/website/CONTRIBUTE.md#translation-guide >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 7:24 PM Brian Hulette <bhule...@google.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Changing the URLs is fine with me as long as the old urls will work too. >>>> >>>> But do we need to change the filenames for the blog posts to accomplish >>>> that? It's nice that the blog post markdown files start with a date so they >>>> naturally sort chronologically. It looks like this hugo PR [1] made it >>>> possible to extract date metadata and slug >>>> (i.e. dataflow-python-sdk-is-now-public) separately from the filename. >>>> >>>> [1] https://github.com/gohugoio/hugo/pull/4494 >>>> >>>> On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 10:06 AM Ahmet Altay <al...@google.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 9:55 AM Thomas Weise <t...@apache.org> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> For changed URLs, will previous URLs be mapped to avoid broken >>>>>> external links? >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I believe the answer is yes from Nam's response "For now, we keep the >>>>> old URLs working in terms of redirecting them". I very much agree that >>>>> this >>>>> is very important and should work for all existing urls. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 9:34 AM Aizhamal Nurmamat kyzy < >>>>>> aizha...@apache.org> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> To give a little more context regarding the URLs, the date should >>>>>>> still appear on the blog post, but not on the URL. >>>>>>> For example, we'd have: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> https://beam.apache.org/beam/python/sdk/2016/02/25/python-sdk-now-public.html >>>>>>> become >>>>>>> https://beam.apache.org/blog/dataflow-python-sdk-is-now-public/. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> I am not a content marketer. IMO, this is a good change. In the past, >>>>> a few times, we edited dates on posts (e.g. a release date was entered >>>>> incorrectly) and we had to either have a mismatch between dates in the url >>>>> and the date in the blog, or change the url. This change simplifies, by >>>>> having date only in place (in content metadata). >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> The blog posts would have a small header showing the title, author >>>>>>> and publish date. But the URL would not have it. >>>>>>> Thoughts? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 9:23 AM Nam Bui <nam....@polidea.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> @altay: Hey hey. Yeah, I didn't expect the baseUrl of staging >>>>>>>> version is " >>>>>>>> http://apache-beam-website-pull-requests.storage.googleapis.com/11554/"; >>>>>>>> which also includes "/11554", and Hugo considers it as a path so it >>>>>>>> breaks >>>>>>>> the path of "static files" (like images). We made a fix. Now I'm >>>>>>>> working on >>>>>>>> "getting git to recognize files as renames" as you suggested. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> @robert: The dates are nice but it causes verbose/long/ugly URLs. >>>>>>>> We discussed with Aizhamal in the development stage and agreed to get >>>>>>>> rid >>>>>>>> of this. For now, we keep the old URLs working in terms of redirecting >>>>>>>> them. However, from now on, we should change the name convention on >>>>>>>> blog >>>>>>>> posts to have a fancy URL like "beam.apache.org/blog/myblogpost.md". >>>>>>>> :) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 2:57 AM Robert Bradshaw < >>>>>>>> rober...@google.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 5:08 PM Ahmet Altay <al...@google.com> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Nam, this looks better. At least links are working, and the >>>>>>>>>> website visually looks similar and generally in good shape. I think >>>>>>>>>> there >>>>>>>>>> are still issues. For example, I do not see any of the images (e.g. >>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>> beam logo on top left is missing.) >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 3:11 PM Brian Hulette < >>>>>>>>>> bhule...@google.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I left a comment on the PR [1]. I think the reason all of the >>>>>>>>>>> website content is not being tracked as file renames is because >>>>>>>>>>> there was a >>>>>>>>>>> series of commits that created files in the new directory, and then >>>>>>>>>>> one >>>>>>>>>>> commit that deleted the old directory. If there were a single >>>>>>>>>>> commit with >>>>>>>>>>> all of the deleted and new files, git would surely recognize they >>>>>>>>>>> are >>>>>>>>>>> effectively renameds and mark them as such. Maybe we just need to >>>>>>>>>>> get all >>>>>>>>>>> these commits squashed into one? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> [1] >>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/11554#issuecomment-621489844 >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Nam, could you try this? If we can get git to recognize these as >>>>>>>>>> renames, review process would be much easier. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> +1. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Alternatively, create a commit that just moves the files into a >>>>>>>>> new location (which git can always detect), then sit the edits on top >>>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>>> that (which should preserve history better). >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Also, is there a reason the dates were removed from the blog post >>>>>>>>> filenames? For content like that, the dates are nice. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 10:39 AM Nam Bui <nam....@polidea.com> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Hi guys, >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I'm Nam - from the responsible team of Apache Beam website >>>>>>>>>>>> migration. I am pleased to answer some of the questions here. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> @aizhamal: Thanks for informing to the community. :) >>>>>>>>>>>> @altay, @robertwb: Yes. there is a problem with the staged >>>>>>>>>>>> version at the moment. We didn't expect some behaviours on the >>>>>>>>>>>> build >>>>>>>>>>>> process. So, we fixed it today and been waiting for @pablo to >>>>>>>>>>>> re-run it >>>>>>>>>>>> again. The purpose of this PR is to migrate completely Beam site >>>>>>>>>>>> from >>>>>>>>>>>> Jekyll to Hugo. Therefore, a bunch of deleted markdown files are >>>>>>>>>>>> from >>>>>>>>>>>> Jekyll which was located at `beam/website/src`, and Hugo is >>>>>>>>>>>> located at >>>>>>>>>>>> `beam/website/www` now. In `beam/website/README.md`, I wrote down >>>>>>>>>>>> about >>>>>>>>>>>> running the Hugo website locally, although it is actually same as >>>>>>>>>>>> Jekyll >>>>>>>>>>>> (because it's also set up with Docker & Gradle). In >>>>>>>>>>>> `beam/website/CONTRIBUTE.md`, I guided people on how to get >>>>>>>>>>>> started with >>>>>>>>>>>> Hugo on the Beam website. There is also a link in the "Translation >>>>>>>>>>>> Guide" >>>>>>>>>>>> section which points to a branch of multilingual provenance, and >>>>>>>>>>>> it will >>>>>>>>>>>> become a next PR soon. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Please let me know if you need more details. Feel free to ask >>>>>>>>>>>> any questions and I will get back to you with answers. I'm so >>>>>>>>>>>> sorry if I >>>>>>>>>>>> answer a little bit due to the timezone. :) >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Best regards, >>>>>>>>>>>> Nam >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 8:49 PM Aizhamal Nurmamat kyzy < >>>>>>>>>>>> aizha...@apache.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Adding +Nam Bui <nam....@polidea.com> and +Karolina Rosół >>>>>>>>>>>>> <karolina.ro...@polidea.com> to follow up on questions. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 11:34 AM Ahmet Altay <al...@google.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I am having trouble reviewing the staged version. What is the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> best way to review this change? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Do we expect any changes to markdown files, beyond some >>>>>>>>>>>>>> metadata? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 10:45 AM Robert Bradshaw < >>>>>>>>>>>>>> rober...@google.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks. It'll be great to better support more languages. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I looked at the PR and there seems to be no >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> provenance/history. E.g. all the content seems to be entirely >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> new files >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rather than diffs from the old. (There also seems to be a huge >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> amount of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> auto-generated js code as well.) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I agree. This makes it very hard to review. I also see a >>>>>>>>>>>>>> bunch of deleted markdown files. Are they not getting migrated? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 10:23 AM Aizhamal Nurmamat kyzy < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> aizha...@apache.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello everybody, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We are almost done migrating the Apache Beam website from >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jekyll to Hugo. You can see the PR in [1], and we'd love to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hear your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> feedback/comments on the PR. It includes detailed guidelines >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> contributing to the new Hugo-based website and adding >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> translations to pages >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [2]. For those who are curious about adding new languages, we >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will provide >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a proof of concept in the next couple of days in this thread. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Since we want to move forward with the PR, I would like to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ask the community to hold off changes to the current Beam >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> website for a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> week, until we are able to review and merge the PR. Is this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> acceptable to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> everyone? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In case anyone missed my previous email with the background >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for the website migration, you can find more context here [3]. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Aizhamal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [1] https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/11554 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [2] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/beam/blob/256b7042bf504b94f161ca03b388a2ba247918d9/website/CONTRIBUTE.md >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [3] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r7fa6d710c0a1959cce5108e460d71c306ce5756cf96af818b41cb7ca%40%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
