Hi, in the past some effort has been made to make all log4xxx project websites look alike. If the site design should be changed, I propose to expand the discussion to the other projects.
Greets, Dominik -- Sent from my phone. On Wed, Mar 10, 2021, 18:33 Ralph Goers <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Mar 10, 2021, at 9:07 AM, Volkan Yazıcı <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > My tentative plan is the following: > > > > 1. Get a brand new shiny logo! > > Why? Not that I am in love with our current logo but it was the winner of > the logo contest. > > > 2. Get a brand new design > > - for the landing page (HTML, CSS, and images) > > > - for internal pages directly accessed by the landing page (HTML, > CSS) > > - for AsciiDoc-generated reference manual theme (CSS) > > I believe we used to use a custom skin. When I converted the web site to > GitHub I believe it may have changed to the standard fluid skin since the > prior skin was somehow embedded in the CMS. If we continue to use the Maven > Site plugin the skin can be modified by following > https://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-site-plugin/examples/creatingskins.html > < > https://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-site-plugin/examples/creatingskins.html > >. > > > 3. Migrate all reference manual to AsciiDoc – we are almost there > > I know I ran into a problem with the logging in the cloud page which is > why I left it markdown. > > > 4. Update AsciiDoc theme > > 5. Restructure existing manual sections and content (this is big!) > > 6. Create a landing website for Log4j using new designs and JBake, > which > > we already use > > 7. Make reference manual accessible in two flavors: > > 1. /doc/reference/latest/index.html > > 2. /doc/reference/<release>/index.html > > > > As you might guess, only the first two tasks will be done by the hired > > professional. The rest is still on our shoulders. > > > > Note that the reference manual will still be built from the sources via > > asciidoc-maven-plugin. Same applies to the landing page generation via > > JBake. Hence I will only touch the content, not the mechanics. > > Actually, only the logging services site uses JBake. All the rest are > currently using the Maven Site Plugin. > > I guess I should say I am assuming you are talking about the Log4j web > site. If you are talking about the logging services web site then it does > JBake and could most certainly use an upgrade (not that the log4j web site > can’t be improved too). > > If you want to move Log4j to use JBake that would be a much bigger > undertaking. As I said things like the Changelog page, Jira issues, > javadocs, dependency info, etc are all generated by the site plugin. > Invoking them outside of it might not work since some are only designed to > work within it. > > Ralph
