Hi Denis, > You could possibly save a database and a > maintenance-requiring content management system here.
Nothing to save here: This is a multi-page setup, Saros is only one of the pages. > Is there any particular reason why Drupal would be needed at all? [...] > As far as I can tell, there is nothing dynamic about the current Saros site A few reasons from the top of my head: - There is a contact form (used about one to two times every week) - Saros-project.org is not just a collection of developer documentation snippets. There are also pages for the *users* of Saros: It's really helpful to a have a WYSIWYG editor for this. - We chose Drupal (precisely: chose to piggy-back on an existing Drupal installation) to have the freedom to add non-static content. The in-depth discussion (measuring and weighing the actual pain of sticking with Drupal) would be up to the student taking over that thesis. > Yeah, that's nice in general. I don't think that DocBook would fly with this > developer > generation, though. That wasn't meant as an argument in favor of DocBook :) (As formulated on the thesis page: "Transfer the existing documentation contents into a text-based format.") I just wanted to point out that there already *is* a considerable infrastructure to build upon. Cheers, Franz -----Original Message----- From: Denis Washington [mailto:de...@denisw.de] Sent: Monday, August 24, 2015 1:43 PM To: Zieris, Franz <franz.zie...@fu-berlin.de>; Stefan Rossbach <srossb...@arcor.de> Cc: dpp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: RE: Page editing (was: Coding Conventions <==> Practice) Franz Zieris wrote: > Denis wrote: > > > For instance, there is http://jekyllrb.com > > I'm not sure how this plays together with our Drupal setup, but it does not > look like a completely absurd idea, e.g. [2]. Is there any particular reason why Drupal would be needed at all? Jekyll could take care of the complete page. As far as I can tell, there is nothing dynamic about the current Saros site, and the user accounts wouldn't be needed anymore when editing happens through Git and Gerrit. You could possibly save a database and a maintenance-requiring content management system here. > Denis wrote: > > > After that, you can keep the whole website (template + Markdown files > > for the pages) in a Git repository and adopt the Gerrit code review > > flow. > > As stated here [1], there even *is* already a Git repo on Gerrit, incl. > Jenkins jobs for "building" and "deployment". Yeah, that's nice in general. I don't think that DocBook would fly with this developer generation, though. It is a pretty complex format and writing / editing all of these tags is quite tedious. Markdown, on the other hand, can be completely learned in an hour or so (including possible Jekyll extensions). It is also the dominant documentation format in the open-source space (alone for being the default README format in GitHub) and it is very likely that developers already know Markdown. As the barrier to entry should be as low as possible, I think these are important arguments. Of course, the DocBook files have the advantage of actually already existing (provided The content is current enough that this is an advantage). Regards, Denis ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ DPP-Devel mailing list DPP-Devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dpp-devel
