On Tue, Oct 27, 2026 at 7:59 PM Manfred Moser <[email protected]> wrote:
> Totally agree with Elliotte. We should us our own tooling or at a > minimum stay with Java/JVM-based solution to keep things simpler. > > The docs source should also continue to sit with the same repos as they > are so we dont have to change a lot of infra and process. > I agree, especially since all the plugins also use doxia (if I understand it correctly). I don't think using doxia is a detractor for good documentation, nor a modern web design. But it might need some tweaking to enable new features, but I think that is for the better. I rebuilt my demo site using doxia, a new skin and a search index update all from maven. This version of the example is built with Maven’s own tooling: mvn site, maven-site-plugin and Doxia, from the same sources as maven.apache.org. The frame is a skin of its own (doxia/skin), the structure is the site descriptor content/site.xml, one menu three levels deep, and the landing pages, the news and the A–Z index are Markdown pages written from the same data by a small script. After the pages are rendered, two small classes run from the POM colour the code (Highlight) and write the search index (SearchIndex). Not in this version: the date a page last changed; moving pages to new addresses would add .htaccess redirects. The version built with Jekyll has those. You can see the results here: https://dashorst.github.io/maven-site/mvn-site/ Let me know if you have any feedback. Kind regards, Martijn Dashorst
