accumulo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dylan Hutchison <dhutc...@cs.washington.edu>
Subject Re: git-based site and jekyll
Date Fri, 11 Mar 2016 18:10:11 GMT
Sounds great Chris!

On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 9:50 AM, Christopher <ctubbsii@apache.org> wrote:

> So, if everybody's happy doing this, I'll go ahead and perform the
> following steps:
>
> 1. Push gh-pages branch to our repo
> 2. Perform a jekyll build on the branch and put it in a branch called "
> accumulo.apache.org"
> 3. Push the accumulo.apache.org branch
> 4. File INFRA ticket to switch our site to git using the
> accumulo.apache.org
> branch
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 11:46 AM Billie Rinaldi <billie.rinaldi@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > 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