Looks good, here some insights if I would have to redo today: 1. (Minor) In snippets always close jsonb instances (or mapper), else people tend to not do it and think we do leak ;) 2. Maybe not Hugo but a java and adoc based generator (jbake, minisite or a like) 3. Maybe build assets (js and css), this rarely scales well with time (portability, brosser support management, maintainability - human or token$) 4. Ensure it is integrated to the default build (2 helps there) otherwise it is another decoralated project 5. Not sure where it comes from but thème is very claud-ish, maybe do something more "us"?
That said it looks better than what we do have today Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau <https://x.com/rmannibucau> | .NET Blog <https://dotnetbirdie.github.io/> | Blog <https://rmannibucau.github.io/> | Old Blog <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book <https://www.packtpub.com/en-us/product/java-ee-8-high-performance-9781788473064> Javaccino <https://javaccino.dev/> founder (Java/.NET service - contact via linkedin) Le mar. 11 août 2026, 16:39, Thomas Andraschko <[email protected]> a écrit : > +1 > > Am Di., 11. Aug. 2026 um 16:32 Uhr schrieb Mark Struberg via dev < > [email protected]>: > > > looks really great. Go for it! > > > > I think we should create a ticket for setting up the git repo for site > and > > then just do it. > > > > +1 from me for it. > > > > LieGrue, > > strub > > > > > Am 11.08.2026 um 16:22 schrieb Markus Jung <[email protected]>: > > > > > > Hey all, > > > > > > > > > I'd like to propose rewriting the site. The current one pretty old, IMO > > does not look good and is generated through maven which more often than > not > > causes problems regenerating and publishing it since we don't do it very > > often. > > > > > > > > > As an experiment I've rebuilt the site independent of maven on top of a > > static html generator and gave it a more modern look, you can find a > > deployed version here https://jungm.github.io/johnzon-site-proposal/, > > source code would be on https://github.com/jungm/johnzon-site-proposal. > > This also intentionally drops all reports maven injected into the site, > the > > only thing remaining right now would be javadocs. > > > > > > WDYT of this? Should we be redoing the site in general? Do you like the > > proposal, would you change something or do it completely different? > > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > Markus > > > > > > > >
