On Sun, 6 Mar 2022 at 14:43, Greg Stein <gst...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Sun, Mar 6, 2022 at 4:52 AM sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Sun, 6 Mar 2022 at 10:30, Greg Stein <gst...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >... > > > > Thus: my suggestion that the source content for the site lives on the > > main > > > branch (next to all our code) in the "site" subdir, and gets generated to > > > the "asf-site" branch. Apache STeVe developers shouldn't ever have to > > > change branches (stick to "main" for both dev and site work). > > > > OK, in which case I agree that it is not a disadvantage for the > > average developer. > > > > AFAICT it makes the site build process more complicated, but that is > > usually automated. > > > > Hunh? It would be totally automated. Push a change to main:/site and then > pelican produces a change and pushes to asf-site branch. Then it appears on > the website.
I was thinking about needing to test a change locally, without committing. Or needing to investigate a site build issue. > This build is part of the .asf.yaml system. It's basically invisible. Just > change the .md files and they appear a few seconds later on the website. > Even better: on github.com, you can use the "pencil" to edit the .md files > and then click the "Preview" tab before committing. The process uses the > same markdown as GitHub's preview (minus the page CSS, of course). And I > mean *the same* ... we use GitHub Inc's C library to perform the > markdown->HTML translation. It makes editing .md files much like a wiki in > ease-of-use. Indeed, but there may still be the occasional need to try local builds. > Cheers, > -g
