+1 for this idea. i probably should have phrased my idea better, this is exactly what i think we need !
On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 6:35 PM, Christopher <ctubb...@apache.org> wrote: > I think I remember the same thing... but in that case, the content was > hosted exclusively in GitHub. This suggestion is that the content is hosted > in ASF repos, and it just happens to be mirrored in GitHub, which > conveniently does rendering. Ultimately, the value to be gained is: > > 1) better looking sites, with modern themes and tools for maintenance > 2) less burden on INFRA and more ease of projects to update their sites > 3) enhance the communication between projects and their users > > The CNAME features could be used to make sure the URL is "<project>. > apache.org" or "projects.apache.org/<project>" or similar, so that it's > still clear that it's official ASF content being presented (remember, we'd > still control the content in ASF infrastructure, because we control the > repos). Another possibility, if we have concerns about GitHub altering our > official content (or whatever legal reasons we have) is that ASF could > provide a similar/compatible mechanism to render these branches in our > infrastructure as an alternative to CMS. That seems like more work for > INFRA, though. > > > -- > Christopher L Tubbs II > http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii > > On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 6:23 PM, Jay Vyas <jayunit100.apa...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > I like the idea. Anything to avoid requiring svn to update project sites. > > > > But... Iirc I started a similar thread before and was told that > forwarding > > Apache.org to github static site was against the rules ?Maybe I > > misinterpreted ... > > > > > > > > > On Mar 4, 2015, at 4:06 PM, Christopher <ctubb...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > > All, > > > > > > Has any thought been put into leveraging GitHub pages for project > > > documentation, static site hosting? A lot of www.apache.org is simple > > > static content, as are project pages. Since a lot of projects are now > > using > > > git, and we mirror projects in GitHub, perhaps we can help the > individual > > > projects maintain their site's static content by simply committing to a > > > gh-pages branch for their project? > > > > > > Since it's just static content which is still hosted and controlled by > > ASF, > > > but simply placed in a way that GitHub can render it from the mirrors, > I > > > don't think there's too many issues of concern, but wasn't sure if > > > anybody's put any thought into it. I know it would certainly be easier > > for > > > some projects than using the existing CMS system with SVN (especially > > those > > > otherwise developing exclusively with Git). > > > > > > It might "just work" today, but I haven't tried it. I'd be willing to > > work > > > with INFRA to help experiment with it, though (especially if we wanted > to > > > try out the CNAME feature). > > > > > > More info: https://pages.github.com/ > > > > > > -- > > > Christopher L Tubbs II > > > http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii > > > -- jay vyas
