Sent from my iPad
> On 19 Apr 2018, at 17:10, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On 19 April 2018 at 13:27, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: >> I have done some further investigation of using JSON and Jekyll. >> >> I think JSON is not the best format for maintenance. >> This is because it is messy including chunks of text (e.g. for >> additional info on the project). >> Also it does not allow any comments. >> The format is rather strict, with lots of quotes needed, and brackets >> and braces. >> >> I think we should use YAML for the raw data, and (if necessary) >> extract a subset into a JSON file for external consumption. >> >> As to Jekyll: >> >> Jekyll can equally use a YAML data file, so it is not a problem >> changing to YAML. >> >> At present the attic-test PoC includes a single JSON data file which >> is processed in a plugin script that generates the individual page >> data. >> >> This works well (and it looks like BuildBot supports the use of Jekyll >> plugin scripts - other sites such as GitHub may not) >> >> But I think it would be better to have a separate YAML file per project. >> >> Jekyll can process these as part of a collection. >> This avoids the need to use a plugin to generate the pages. >> I think it also makes it a bit more obvious what is going on (each >> output file has an input file) >> >> And the YAML body can contain arbitrary markup to be added to the >> generated page. >> This would make it easier to preserve the extra information present in >> some of the existing xml files >> >> A question: >> On a tablet, would it be harder to maintain one file per project >> rather than a single large file? >> >> i.e. instead of updating projects.json one would need to create/update >> a projects/project.md file. > > I have updated the attic-test tree with a YAML-based version: > > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/attic/site-test/yaml is this a correct link, seems To miss yaml files and still contains a projects.json ? rgds jan i > > The yaml.sh script in the parent directory will create the output in docs3/. > This should currently be identical to the output in docs2/ - apart > from the date in feed.xml > > If this looks like it will be suitable for use when working from > tablets, I can tidy it up and start migrating some of the additional > text from the xdocs/projects files > > If not, please advise what needs to be done to make it possible to > update the site from a tablet.
