On Fri, Sep 22, 2023, at 22:08, Ralph Goers wrote:
> Personally, I hate all these tools. I picked JBake simply because I
> could figure out how to run it with a simple Maven command.
>
> I really don’t see how you can make it any simpler by changing the
> tooling. If you look at the instructions they are all git commands
> except for “mvn install”.
>
> The current web site supports markdown and asciidoc.
>
> I am not in favor of changing the tooling for the sake of changing the
> tooling. I am in favor of changing the tooling if there is some major
> tangible benefit. I have always wanted to use tooling that would let us
> edit the pages in a GUI editor similar to like Wix or Squarespace do. I
> despise having to write things in Markdown or Asiciidoc and then run a
> tool so I can preview what it is going to look like.
>
> In other words, I want the ease of editing and maintaining the web site
> to drive the tooling decision, not the other way around.
Currently, there are 10 steps listed for deploying the website.
I do "git commit && push"
Currently, we have to install JBake
In my scenario, I use Docker.
As an example, for the privacy website to check:
docker run --rm -p 4000:4000 --mount type=bind,src=$PWD,dst=/root/build --mount
type=volume,dst=/root/build/node_modules -it apache/privacy_apache_org serve
--watch --incremental
There are significant benefits in this, such as speed of deployment, support of
infra, etc pp.
I don't see any reason to stick with JBake.
I understand you don't like static site generators, but in this case, a less
frequently updated website, I see benefits: easy blogging support and ASF
support. Additionally, Docker support.
There is also GUI support for Jekyll and Hugo, but I don't like it. There is
none for JBake to my knowledge.
I an not changing the tooling because I like Jekyll better, but because it is a
standard, I have autodeploy tools ready and it generally is better understood
than JBake.
Kind regards,
Christian
>
> Ralph
>
>> On Sep 22, 2023, at 11:47 AM, Christian Grobmeier <grobme...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> the current landing page:
>> https://logging.apache.org/
>>
>> is done with JBake. We have rather complicated instructions on how to
>> re-generate the landing page:
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/LOGGING/Managing+the+Logging+Services+Web+Sites
>>
>> The Infra team recommends Pelican or Jekyll to create these kinds of pages.
>> I have in-depth knowledge of Jekyll and would like to propose migrating the
>> current landing page to Jekyll.
>>
>> The benefits:
>>
>> - autodeploy of our changes
>> - great support of blogging (I'd like to create one)
>> - easy handling and supported by Infra
>> - writing content in Markdown
>>
>> I am aware that we have a discussion open on how to do documentation in the
>> future. I would still like to migrate the page asap and - if deemed
>> necessary - touch it again later.
>>
>> So far, I will leave all design/content intact until migrated, and come back
>> with additional changes (as the blog) after migration to be discussed
>> separately.
>>
>> If there are no objections, I will start with this move sometime next week.
>>
>> Thanks!
>> Christian
>>
>> --
>> The Apache Software Foundation
>> V.P., Data Privacy
