accumulo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Billie Rinaldi <billie.rina...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: git-based site and jekyll
Date Fri, 11 Mar 2016 16:46:39 GMT
Wow, that's looking great.  Thanks, Christopher!

Billie

On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 10:38 PM, Christopher <ctubbsii@apache.org> wrote:

> Thanks Josh! I fixed all the issues you saw, except the screenshots one,
> since that's currently just how our layout is (looks the same at
> accumulo.apache.org).
>
> Most of the bugs you saw were existing bugs with either our HTML or our
> Markdown... but whatever CMS is doing is a bit more tolerant than Kramdown
> is apparently.
>
> Biggest problem I saw was that people keep forgetting quotes around HTML
> attributes. Example, it should be <a href="location">, not <a
> href=location>.
>
> On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 9:57 PM Josh Elser <josh.elser@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > * Some companies on http://ctubbsii.github.io/accumulo/people.html are
> > goofed as are the timezones.
> > * Some broken links on http://ctubbsii.github.io/accumulo/source.html.
> > Coding practices are also messed up.
> > * http://ctubbsii.github.io/accumulo/contrib.html contrib project
> > entries are a little wacky.
> > * http://ctubbsii.github.io/accumulo/screenshots.html is weird with the
> > monitor screenshot (should be beneath the text?)
> > * Just noticed that Other and Documentation both have a link to the
> > papers/presentations. That might actually be how the site is now, just
> > realized it's duplicative.
> >
> > Thanks again for doing this. It's great!
> >
> > Christopher wrote:
> > > Actually, I now have it all working (as far as I can tell) with
> > everything
> > > pretty much the same as it looks with CMS today. After people have
> taken
> > > the time to give it a glance, I'll push it to the ASF repo, and then
> push
> > > the generated site to a separate branch. Then we can put in the INFRA
> > > ticket to switch from svn to git.
> > >
> > > On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 6:42 PM Christopher<ctubbsii@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > >
> > >> I'm working on converting our current site contents over to jekyll at
> > >> https://github.com/ctubbsii/accumulo/tree/gh-pages
> > >> (view at http://ctubbsii.github.io/accumulo)
> > >>
> > >> Yes, it's terrible right now... it's in progress. :)
> > >>
> > >> On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 4:21 PM Josh Elser<josh.elser@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Lazy consensus is fine. If there are no objections, I don't want to
> > hold
> > >>> things up. I feel like I've adequately expressed my concerns. Silence
> > >>> can and should be treated as acknowledgement for this, IMO.
> > >>>
> > >>> Christopher wrote:
> > >>>> Another reason we probably shouldn't worry about this: anybody
can
> > >>> create a
> > >>>> DNS name at their leisure which transparently redirects to
> > >>>> accumulo.apache.org and serves its contents. This is perfectly
> > >>> legitimate
> > >>>> for a number of reasons, including corporate proxies/mirrors,
> > >>>> URL-shortening services, caching services, archiving services,
> > >>>> vision-impaired accessibility services, foreign-language DNS
> mappings,
> > >>> and
> > >>>> so-on.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I think when it comes to trademarks and our website, our area of
> > concern
> > >>>> should mostly focus on when people misrepresent our trademark in
the
> > >>> course
> > >>>> of their mirroring/archiving. There's no risk of that for a mirror
> > that
> > >>> is
> > >>>> explicitly under our control, but I'm really leaning towards the
> > >>> javascript
> > >>>> to detect and display a message about the canonical location just
to
> > >>>> mitigate any possibility for concern.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> If you still have concerns, I'd be happy to put it up for a formal
> > vote
> > >>>> from the PMC, or to get feedback from ASF trademarks folks before
we
> > >>>> proceed.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 3:22 PM Josh Elser<josh.elser@gmail.com>
> >  wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> Well, I think the difference is that archive.org (and others
--
> > google
> > >>>>> cached pages come to mind) are devoted/known for that specific
> > purpose.
> > >>>>> The fact that Github ends up being a "de-facto" location for
> software
> > >>>>> projects, I'm just nervous about the expecting good faith from
the
> > >>>>> denizens of the internet. Maybe I'm just worrying too much.
If
> > there's
> > >>>>> sufficient "it'll be ok" opinion coming from the PMC, it's
fine by
> > me.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Christopher wrote:
> > >>>>>> I can't imagine there's a trademark issue since it's really
just
> > >>> acting
> > >>>>> as
> > >>>>>> a mirror. If there were trademark issues, I imagine sites
like
> > >>>>>> http://archive.org would be in big trouble. But, it certainly
> > >>> couldn't
> > >>>>> hurt
> > >>>>>> to find out.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Another option to sabotage the GH-rendered site is to add
some
> > >>> javascript
> > >>>>>> which detects the location and displays an informative
link back
> to
> > >>> the
> > >>>>>> canonical location for the site. That should be simple
enough to
> do.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 1:36 PM Josh Elser<josh.elser@gmail.com>
> > >>>   wrote:
> > >>>>>>> It's also probably worth mentioning that this concern
only comes
> > >>> about
> > >>>>>>> for point #4 (or if we use the branch name gh-pages
in point #1).
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Josh Elser wrote:
> > >>>>>>>> The one concern I had was regarding automatic rendering
of what
> > >>> would
> > >>>>>>>> look like "the Apache Accumulo website" on Github
(both
> > >>> apache/accumulo
> > >>>>>>>> github account and other forks).
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Christopher had said that no one seemed to object
in comdev@
> when
> > >>> he
> > >>>>>>>> talked about this a while back. I wanted to make
sure everyone
> > >>>>>>>> considered this (for example, Christopher's fork
of Drill's
> > >>> repository
> > >>>>>>>> now also looks like a canonical host of the Apache
Drill
> project).
> > >>> I'm
> > >>>>>>>> not actively stating that I think it's an issue
at this point,
> > only
> > >>>>>>>> suggesting that we give it some thought and maybe
ask someone
> who
> > is
> > >>>>>>>> more knowledgable (Shane from trademarks?) before
moving
> forward.
> > >>> The
> > >>>>>>>> worst case I envision is that we find some way
to "gimp" the
> > >>>>>>>> github-rendered site (redirect back to the canonical
> > >>>>> accumulo.apache.org
> > >>>>>>>> or similar).
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Christopher wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>> I got some information back from INFRA about
how the git-based
> > >>> sites
> > >>>>>>>>> work.
> > >>>>>>>>> It's just plain old static hosting of a git
branch. So,
> whatever
> > >>> we'd
> > >>>>>>> put
> > >>>>>>>>> in a specified branch would show up directly
on the site, no
> > >>> rendering
> > >>>>>>> or
> > >>>>>>>>> generation. This would completely bypass CMS
and buildbot
> staging
> > >>>>>>> builds.
> > >>>>>>>>> Was discussing this with elserj in IRC, and
these ideas came
> out
> > of
> > >>>>>>> that:
> > >>>>>>>>> 1. Switch site to use git branch named "site"
or "website" or
> > >>> similar.
> > >>>>>>>>> 2. Use jekyll 3 to generate the static site
contents in this
> git
> > >>>>> branch.
> > >>>>>>>>> 3. Store the unrendered (markdown) jekyll stuff
in a gh-pages
> > >>> branch.
> > >>>>>>>>> 4. Possibly set up a post-commit hook on gh-pages
branch to
> > render
> > >>>>>>>>> locally
> > >>>>>>>>> and commit the generated static site to the
"site" branch.
> > >
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message