Hi all,
Nam and Brian have been working together on blog post names and
the decision was to keep them as they are for now, because Hugo doesn’t
fully support the feature that was mentioned earlier [1]. Also I believe
this can be done after merging the PR.
1) Currently, the main blocker for merging is Staging Test Failures.
Michal showed Nam how to handle the 1st test which was about Apache License
missing.
However, the 2nd and 3rd tests looked like some kind of permissions error
on the Jenkins worker, not to be configured by code. For more details based
on Jenkin logs, the 2nd test failed because of website/www/site/themes and
the 3rd test failed because of website/www/node_modules, they are both
auto-generated files on build. Can someone help Nam to look into this?
RAT ("Run RAT PreCommit") — FAILURE
Website_Stage_GCS ("Run Website_Stage_GCS PreCommit") — FAILURE
Website_Stage_GCS ("Run Website_Stage_GCS PreCommit") — FAILURE
2) Are there any other blockers for merging? @Ahmet/Robert/others please
share if there are any other blockers.
[1] https://github.com/gohugoio/hugo/pull/4494
On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 10:19 AM Robert Bradshaw <rober...@google.com> wrote:
> On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 7:07 PM Ahmet Altay <al...@google.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 6:30 PM Robert Bradshaw <rober...@google.com>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I took the massive commit and split it up into:
> >>>
> >>> (1) Infrastructure changes (basically everything outside of
> >>> (website/www/site/content)
> >>> (2) Sed script changes, and
> >>> (3) Manual changes (everything not in (1) and (2)).
> >
> >
> > Thank you Robert. This makes it much easier. What is the source of the
> sed script? I am not sure why some of those lines are there. It would be
> much easier for us to comment on the script source if it is reviewable
> somewhere.
>
> I just gathered up common patterns as I was trying to go through and
> review the files... Mostly it was an exercise in finding a compact
> representation for the delta, not trying to be a perfect conversion.
> (I do think in retrospect, if we do something like this again, it
> would be preferable to commit a script that does the auto-conversion
> (maybe even with some patch files for manual changes) both for ease of
> reviewing and to avoid the stop-the-world situation we're in now. (I'm
> still worried that some changes will get lost in the shuffle.)
>
