Hi romain, updated my proposal now, think it looks a lot less claude-like now. WDYT?
My main reason for my gut feeling to split it is that often site updates are something that are being done post-release, when everything else is already finalized. Its then when you notice something in the site is wrong/broken and technically the site doesn’t match the release anymore when fixing it, so I’d argue to just split it off to not have it hard linked to a release. Mabe we can do something like tomee does and create a docs/ folder in the johnzon main repo that is being pulled in when generating the site? Thanks Markus > On 12. Aug 2026, at 14:24, Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]> wrote: > > A few details to try to complete after your comments: > > 3. it is more about having an optimized (loading fast) and browser friendly > (compatible) site automatically rather than building, alternative is to > build manually every month and sync manually but not sure we'll do it. to > have done it a lot - and still doing for some $$ stuff, manual css and js > is rarely really portable nor optimized (loading) so worth doing due to the > length we reach in the poc > 4. one reason is to generate part of the doc like the list of converters or > supported mapping, always worth having a complete up to date doc IMHO and > ensure when you update code you sync the doc (in the same PR) but maybe my > habit > 5. this it loaded the default frontend skill which is shared "by default" > with every users, something more apache pointing to apache org/shared sites > can help maybe? dont think we want a johnzon specific identity but apache > can be a neutral option, wdyt? > > 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 mer. 12 août 2026 à 09:02, Markus Jung <[email protected]> a écrit : > >> Hi Romain, >> >> >> thx for your feedback! I'll answer each of your points: >> >> 1) will do, content was just ported over from the old mvn-based site >> >> 2) I chose hugo because its quite simple and has been around for long >> enough for me to trust, we can of course decide to use some other static >> site generator. hugo is not a hard choice >> >> 3) dont know about that, ideally this is stuff we build once and then >> probably never touch again. I'm also a friend of keeping complexity low, >> so i'd like to keep out any build steps of js/css. The only thing we're >> really doing to the johnzon site is regenerating it when a new release >> lands or edit markdown, so I'm not too worried >> >> 4) not too sure about that either, I think its okay to have it in a >> different repo as it's not too closely related to johnzon source code. >> All the other ASF projects im involved with also do it that way >> >> 5) thats because I built it with claude, not gonna deny that. I've >> already taken attention to not have it look like any other website that >> claude generates. Can you point out what specifically or in general >> makes you feel that way? would really appreciate some more feedback to >> get that worked out. I could think of the color palette and code snipped >> boxes having that usual border radius right now. Also still not too sure >> about that whole json object thing right on the index page >> >> >> Thanks >> >> Markus >> >> On 8/11/26 18:18, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: >>> 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 >>>>>> >>>>> >>
