[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       activemq-dev
Subject:    Re: [DISCUSS] Jekyll versioning on the website
From:       Robbie Gemmell <robbie.gemmell () gmail ! com>
Date:       2020-07-13 12:41:57
Message-ID: CAFitrpRy5SQq+2v5LCxMioz6Z_ZCtpAF30VtJEHTGV08v0ZvZQ () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

One approach seems to be continuing as is, but using something like
https://bundler.io/ to install a more consistent set of gems so that a
consistent jekyll is used by everyone

For another approach, the site publishing bits have supported
performing an automated Pelican build ages, and it seems they have
since added Jekyll support:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/INFRA/git+-+.asf.yaml+features#git.asf.yamlfeatures-JekyllCMS

The site repo would need reorganized to work with that it seems, but
it looks like it could be made to build master upon pushes and commit
the Jekyll output to another branch in the repo which is then
published. Perhaps using a staging area for the publishing rather than
going direct to the live site, so you can check it first before then
doing another simple push to add the output to the live published
branch.

Robbie

On Fri, 10 Jul 2020 at 19:37, Clebert Suconic <clebert.suconic@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> the github action would have to call jekyll build
> and push the results
>
> On Fri, Jul 10, 2020 at 1:51 PM Krzysztof <h4vret@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > So I am using GitHub actions to handle docs for my ActiveMQ Artemis .NET
> > Client. I was super simple to configure. -->
> > https://github.com/Havret/dotnet-activemq-artemis-client/blob/master/.github/workflows/docusaurus.yml
> >
> > On Fri, Jul 10, 2020 at 4:23 PM Clebert Suconic <clebert.suconic@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I do not see a problem with Jekyll / build the site. it's fairly simple.
> > >
> > > The only problem is with the version people use when building.
> > >
> > >
> > > I wouldn't have a problem on having a CI though.. if someone is
> > > willing to do it... go for it...
> > >
> > > you would need authorization to push changes on the CI (will need to
> > > involve infra on that, to configure Jenkins's authorization to
> > > activemq-website), and it would need to be on demand.. that means..
> > > whenever we have a new commit, it generates the output.
> > >
> > > Another possibility would be github actions perhaps?
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jul 10, 2020 at 1:14 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofre <jb@nanthrax.net>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > CI is a good point. We can trigger a build/publish for each new commit.
> > > >
> > > > However, I think we need to update scripts at least to test locally.
> > > >
> > > > Regards
> > > > JB
> > > >
> > > > > Le 10 juil. 2020 à 07:09, Krzysztof <h4vret@gmail.com> a écrit :
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > My recommendation would be to use Jyckyll in a container and build the
> > > > > website that way.
> > > > >
> > > > > BTW is there any reason why we need to commit the build artifacts? Why
> > > > > can't we just do it on CI, that would solve the problem, wouldn't it?
> > > > >
> > > > > Krzysztof
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Jul 10, 2020 at 6:27 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofre <jb@nanthrax.net>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> Hi,
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Thanks for the update, it's the same issue I had, I wonder if it was
> > > > >> normal or not with new Jekyll version.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> I think it's fair to "force" the Jekyll version and maybe check the
> > > > >> version in the build.sh and server.sh scripts.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Regards
> > > > >> JB
> > > > >>
> > > > >>> Le 10 juil. 2020 Ã  01:13, Clebert Suconic <clebert.suconic@gmail.com>
> > > a
> > > > >> écrit :
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> my next commit on the website will touch every single file because
> > > > >>> something on the update is making one minor change on every file.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> So, I added a node to always update jekyll before doing anything.
> > > > >>> which is fairly simple:
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> # I believe this would do
> > > > >>> gem update
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> if not, this will do
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> gem update jekyll
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> On Thu, Jul 9, 2020 at 2:51 PM Clebert Suconic
> > > > >>> <clebert.suconic@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> I just updated my laptop, and with that came a new version of
> > > Jekyll.
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> When I now build the website, all the html are not changed by this
> > > > >>>> similar change:
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> -<div class="highlighter-rouge"><div class="highlight"><pre
> > > > >>>> class="highlight"><code>BrokerService brokerService = new
> > > > >>>> BrokerService();
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> +<div class="language-plaintext highlighter-rouge"><div
> > > > >>>> class="highlight"><pre class="highlight"><code>BrokerService
> > > > >>>> brokerService = new BrokerService();
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> I don't see a big deal, but later on.. if someone builds with an
> > > > >>>> earlier version of jekyll, that change will be reverted and we will
> > > > >>>> keep on a ping pong.
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> So the question is.. how to enforce a minimal version of Jekyll? and
> > > > >>>> should we do that?
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> WDYT?
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> --
> > > > >>>> Clebert Suconic
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> --
> > > > >>> Clebert Suconic
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Clebert Suconic
> > >
>
>
>
> --
> Clebert Suconic
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]