You have to be kidding me. I now need to use Docker to build the web site? And that is somehow simpler?
Ralph > On Sep 22, 2023, at 2:03 PM, Christian Grobmeier <grobme...@apache.org> wrote: > > > >> 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
