oodt-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Mattmann, Chris A (3980)" <chris.a.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov>
Subject Re: OODT Website Changes (Redux)
Date Tue, 05 Apr 2016 23:35:07 GMT
LOVE the style and of course GH pages and the work there
is superior to the CMS.

Let’s explore this..great start.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
Chief Architect
Instrument Software and Science Data Systems Section (398)
NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
Office: 168-519, Mailstop: 168-527
Email: chris.a.mattmann@nasa.gov
WWW:  http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Director, Information Retrieval and Data Science Group (IRDS)
Adjunct Associate Professor, Computer Science Department
University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
WWW: http://irds.usc.edu/
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++










On 4/5/16, 7:06 PM, "Tom Barber" <tom.barber@meteorite.bi> wrote:

>Okay, spent an hour hacking around ideas tonight, just to get a feel for
>things.
>
>http://buggtb.github.io/oodt-website/
>
>I've only messed around with a frontpage and basic blog listing. You can
>see what i'm trying to do in breaking it up a bunch, I still want to do
>make the text easier to digest, its all a bit "wordy" for a front page, but
>broken up with an architecture diagram I stole from one of Chris' slides
>gives non users a quick visual representation of what it is.
>
>Of course I could have done that in CMS, but I can assure you it was 100
>times quicker locally and pushing the changes up, but as I discussed the
>other day that's not the whole reason, as I was wanting something that
>makes it easier for non technical users to contribute news and blog stuff
>to.
>
>https://raw.githubusercontent.com/buggtb/oodt-website/master/_posts/2016-01-04-oodt-011-released.md
>
>
>They are pretty straightforward, and as we found the other day, there is a
>github based editor for these things for those who don't want to mess with
>markdown. You can also submit blog posts in html and they'll be rendered
>just fine.
>
>I'm not trying to undo the work that was done during the rewrite and Chris
>mentioned his affection for SK's old site, I liked it to, my only gripe
>with that was the inability for easy fixes from users! Which is resolved
>sorta with CMS but personally I think its even easier for users with a
>github fork -> PR setup, which is basically what would happen with
>gitsubpub.
>
>https://github.com/buggtb/oodt-website
>
>I'll probably leave it at that for a while, I just wanted to play with some
>stuff and share it back.
>
>Tom
>
>On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 10:02 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (3980) <
>chris.a.mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov> wrote:
>
>> Understood, OK Tom.
>>
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
>> Chief Architect
>> Instrument Software and Science Data Systems Section (398)
>> NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
>> Office: 168-519, Mailstop: 168-527
>> Email: chris.a.mattmann@nasa.gov
>> WWW:  http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> Director, Information Retrieval and Data Science Group (IRDS)
>> Adjunct Associate Professor, Computer Science Department
>> University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
>> WWW: http://irds.usc.edu/
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 4/5/16, 12:10 PM, "Tom Barber" <tom.barber@meteorite.bi> wrote:
>>
>> >Yeah, I'm not suggesting we switch any time soon.
>> >
>> >My viewpoint is thus: we can do a better job with content, look and feel
>> >and the maintenance side.
>> >
>> >Personally, I find the CMS hard to use, maybe its just me, who knows. So,
>> >my suggestion is purely do some POC work to come up with what may, or may
>> >not be a better solution. If the workflow and tech is acceptable, then
>> >build out the site in the new tech, it can be demoed on GH pages or
>> >wherever in the interim, and finally, when we're happy with the content,
>> >the theme and the ability to update it, then... and only then do we change
>> >it.
>> >
>> >From my own opinion, I want to put some more free time into improving the
>> >site, but I feel that it would be a much quicker and more efficient
>> process
>> >if the stuff wasn't inside CMS, that is all.
>> >
>> >Tom
>> >
>> >On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 2:27 PM, Chris Mattmann <chris.mattmann@gmail.com>
>> >wrote:
>> >
>> >> Tom, my comment here is that we tried to do the exact
>> >> same thing in Summer 2014 on XDATA. Just note that
>> >> “dummy site” is now what we have in our operational
>> >> site for Apache OODT. I think we have just only recently
>> >> come to a point where it’s more stable (we don’t have
>> >> people like Sebb coming externally saying our links don’t
>> >> work).
>> >>
>> >> Now you are proposing to change the site again, which
>> >> design wise is fine by me (though shows how much I know
>> >> since I liked SK’s old site even - and the new site started
>> >> by the next generation also looks nice too). However,
>> >> stability wise it’s not fine by me unless *the entire site*
>> >> is migrated, and until we run a link checker against it
>> >> long before turning on the switch to move over to it.
>> >>
>> >> No one is clamoring for a website redesign - it’s mostly
>> >> been discussion led by you and commented on by Val, and
>> >> Lewis.
>> >>
>> >> My 2c.
>> >>
>> >> Cheers,
>> >> Chris
>> >>
>> >> —
>> >> Chris Mattmann
>> >> chris.mattmann@gmail.com
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On 4/5/16, 8:55 AM, "Tom Barber" <tom.barber@meteorite.bi> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >Okay here's what I propose. Apache CMS will be retired, not any time
>> >> soon, but at some point in the medium term future. ASF Infra offer
>> >> gitsubpub/svnsubpub as the standard for website publishing and we(I?)
>> want
>> >> something more useable for non webdevs. Thats not necessarily code free,
>> >> but certainly an easy process for people to upload new content.
>> >> >My suggestion is that I knock up a dummy replacement site in Jekyll,
>> that
>> >> migrates across a couple of the pages and some dummy blog content, and
>> I'll
>> >> come back and demonstrate the user publishing flow, at which point we
>> can
>> >> have a discussion as to whether its something we pursue, or not.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >Sound like a plan?
>> >> >
>> >> >Of course in the mean time, if anyone else has any suggestions for a
>> >> "dynamic" static website, speak up!
>> >> >
>> >> >Tom
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 10:09 AM, Tom Barber <tom.barber@meteorite.bi>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >Indeed Val
>> >> >Ease of use is something I'm trying to achieve because it makes it
>> easier
>> >> for everyone to help maintain our resources with minimum effort.
>> >> >
>> >> >In Jekyll (if that was a chosen solution Markdown is entirely optional,
>> >> you can just as easily publish HTML content as markdown, I just
>> mentioned
>> >> it as an easy barrier to get people to write blog posts, but there are a
>> >> bunch of HTML generating apps on the market, of you could use the WP
>> >> editor, and hit the source button and copy the content from WP to
>> Jekyll,
>> >> not great always the most obvious workflow, but would do the job.
>> >> >
>> >> >Also, not tried it, but Prose.io gives you a MD WYSIWYG editor for
>> >> github, so assuming we were running the fork -> pull request model, you
>> >> could edit the OODT site using Prose on Github and just push over a pull
>> >> request with the changes made.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >Prose seems to support basic formatting and inserting of images, once
a
>> >> website template is designed I would expect contributers to do any more
>> >> anyway, unless they wanted to, content should be about writing a blog
>> post
>> >> of page and hitting the go button.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >A quick google also reveals some Word to Markdown tools, I've not used
>> >> them either, but I guess they would do a job.
>> >> >
>> >> >Tom
>> >> >​
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 1:30 AM, Mallder, Valerie <
>> >> Valerie.Mallder@jhuapl.edu> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >You are absolutely right, in markdown you would be missing images. My
>> >> objection to using markdown is having to learn a new language syntax for
>> >> styling the text. I have no objection to having a static site. I just
>> want
>> >> it to be easy to use and not require that you have to spend time
>> learning
>> >> something new. If it takes too much time to do (because you have to
>> learn
>> >> some new stuff in order to do it) you may find that people will put it
>> on
>> >> their todo list but never end up getting to it because they are too busy
>> >> working on higher priority tasks in their day jobs. I think your primary
>> >> goal (when choosing what you want to do) should be to add as little
>> work as
>> >> possible to people's plates. That's all. If there are any WYSIWYG
>> editors
>> >> out there that have the option to do a "save as" to markdown format that
>> >> would be optimal. But I don't know if there are any.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >Sent with Good (www.good.com <http://www.good.com>)
>> >> >________________________________
>> >> >From: Tom Barber <tom.barber@meteorite.bi>
>> >> >Sent: Saturday, April 2, 2016 7:17:42 PM
>> >> >To: dev@oodt.apache.org
>> >> >Subject: Re: OODT Website Changes (Redux)
>> >> >
>> >> >Also, (playing devils advocate) if it's a word doc why can't you just
>> copy
>> >> >and paste it into a markdown file?  The only major thing you'd be
>> missing
>> >> >is any images :)
>> >> >
>> >> >Another plus to a static blogging site is, if you decide it sucks in
a
>> few
>> >> >years time,  you just have some html to move somewhere else,  it's
>> just a
>> >> >static website,  if you decide WordPress sucked or infra said they'd
>> host
>> >> >it, then down the line changed their mind,  you'd have a much bigger
>> task
>> >> >on your hands.
>> >> >
>> >> >Tom
>> >> >On 3 Apr 2016 00:07, "Tom Barber" <tom.barber@meteorite.bi> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> Hey Val,
>> >> >>
>> >> >> You can write HTML and a bunch of other stuff, but I'm trying to
>> offer
>> >> up
>> >> >> a solution that is easy for people to deploy and develop on outside
>> of
>> >> the
>> >> >> Apache infrastructure, and markdown, being just text is easy to
>> deploy.
>> >> >> Also Wordpress etc require databases and backing infra where as
>> Jekyll
>> >> is
>> >> >> purely static HTML by the time it is deployed.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I have no idea if Infra would support wordpress anyway, I doubt
it,
>> when
>> >> >> they said they were retiring Apache CMS, it wasn't like "oh but
don't
>> >> worry
>> >> >> folks, you can stand up a wordpress website", I could be wrong,
but
>> that
>> >> >> was my impression.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> At the end of a day, creating a blog post that looks like:
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >>
>> https://raw.githubusercontent.com/maciakl/Sample-Jekyll-Site/master/_posts/2012-02-10-code-snippets.markdown
>> >> >>
>> >> >> is much quicker than writing a bunch of HTML, but the Apache CMS
is
>> >> also a
>> >> >> bit of a lie, because if you think you don't have to write HTML
>> because
>> >> its
>> >> >> a CMS, you're sorely mistaken! ;)
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Tom
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 12:00 AM, Mallder, Valerie <
>> >> >> Valerie.Mallder@jhuapl.edu> wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >>> I am not familiar with Jekyll, but I disagree with using markdown.
>> Why
>> >> >>> must we write in any kind of markup language? That would suck.
Why
>> not
>> >> just
>> >> >>> use a better CMS? There are plenty out there. I personally
develop
>> >> websites
>> >> >>> in Wordpress. It's free and very easy to use. You can edit
posts in
>> a
>> >> >>> WYSIWYG editor. You can also copy-paste from a Word doc into
the
>> post.
>> >> Just
>> >> >>> my opinion.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >>> Sent with Good (www.good.com <http://www.good.com><
>> http://www.good.com
>> >> >)
>> >> >>> ________________________________
>> >> >>> From: Tom Barber <tom.barber@meteorite.bi>
>> >> >>> Sent: Saturday, April 2, 2016 6:45:21 PM
>> >> >>> To: dev@oodt.apache.org
>> >> >>> Subject: OODT Website Changes (Redux)
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Alright folks,
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Most peope who have been on the list for a while know we moved
from
>> the
>> >> >>> most static of static websites to Apache CMS a while ago to
allow
>> for
>> >> more
>> >> >>> regular updating and maintenance of the website.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Lewis then put a bunch of work into creating a template for
the CMS
>> >> >>> website
>> >> >>> and we revamped a lot of the content, but the CMS has a bunch
of
>> issues
>> >> >>> both in the ease of developing a website and also in maintenance
so
>> the
>> >> >>> Infra team are retiring it.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> My personal opinion(having done some of this in my day job,
and
>> >> discussed
>> >> >>> similar on some other ASF projects) is we migrate the website
to
>> >> gitsubpub
>> >> >>> and Jekyll.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> This will give us the ability to easily stand up the existing
>> website
>> >> on
>> >> >>> our own laptops, or development servers make changes and deploy
>> them.
>> >> Also
>> >> >>> without the templating system that Apache CMS enforces upon
you,
>> its  a
>> >> >>> far
>> >> >>> quicker development cycle.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Of course we could just use standard HTML & Javascript,
but part of
>> the
>> >> >>> reason I'd like to use Jekyll is the fact users can create
content
>> >> using
>> >> >>> Markdown syntax instead of HTML and Javascript. Jekyll is a
static
>> >> >>> blogging
>> >> >>> platform, so its designed for frequent updating, and as people
may
>> have
>> >> >>> noticed I've been blogging OODT stuff on my personal blog because
>> the
>> >> CMS
>> >> >>> is a pain to update.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Has anyone got an opinion? It feels like we did stage one which
was
>> >> make
>> >> >>> the website easier to update, but stage two is to make the
process a
>> >> lot
>> >> >>> easier, and standardised.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Cheers
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Tom
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>>
Mime
View raw message