That's the big hurdle I have identified, the initial conversion to Markdown. Perhaps a manual hackathon is the best way.
Bruce On Thu, Dec 7, 2017 at 9:48 AM, Christopher Shannon < [email protected]> wrote: > I agree that Markdown would be a good idea if we can figure out a good way > to convert it. > > On Thu, Dec 7, 2017 at 11:42 AM, Clebert Suconic < > [email protected]> > wrote: > > > +1 > > > > I like the Markdown (or whatever easy format.. non xml based). We will > > need to choose a framework for that. do you have anything in mind? > > > > I also think we should have a consistent look and feel. > > > > > > I will be supportive on this... > > > > > > First thing will be to have a framework chosen.. > > Second to have a github we collaborate... > > Third.. maybe we could use one of those video calls to talk about how to > > do it. > > > > On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 11:20 PM, Bruce Snyder <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > Several opinions have been expressed recently that the ActiveMQ website > > > needs some attention and that Artemis should be made more prominent. > I'd > > > like to discuss some ideas to see what we could achieve on this topic. > > > > > > If we are going to make Artemis more prominent, the first concern I > > > identified is that the ActiveMQ website and the Artemis website are > > > authored differently. The ActiveMQ website is authored in the > Confluence > > > wiki and exported to HTML automagically whereas the Artemis website is > > > authored in raw HTML. As a result, the two sites have a very different > > look > > > and feel to them. This presents some challenges to using the content > > > between the two. > > > > > > But this presents other questions -- do we want the two sites to look > > > similar or different? When someone looks at Artemis content, do we want > > the > > > user to immediately know that they are looking at ActiveMQ content vs. > > > Artemis based content solely due to the look and feel of the site? > Should > > > there even be two different sites? > > > > > > I would prefer to have the site authored in a language that is easier > to > > > write than HTML (such as Markdown). I would also like the files > > comprising > > > the site to live in a git repo. To give the site a modern look and feel > > > means using CSS (e.g., SASS, etc.). All these things can be achieved > > using > > > Jekyll, but first we would need to convert the raw HTML files to > Mardown > > to > > > put in git. I have experimented with some tools to convert HTML to > > Markdown > > > and they are less than ideal. Does anyone have any experience with > this? > > > > > > Sorry for the rambling. Anyone else interested to help tackle this > thorny > > > set of issues? > > > > > > Bruce > > > > > > -- > > > perl -e 'print > > > unpack("u30","D0G)U8V4\@4VYY9&5R\"F)R=6-E+G-N>61E<D\!G;6%I;\"YC;VT*" > );' > > > > > > ActiveMQ in Action: http://bit.ly/2je6cQ > > > Blog: http://bsnyder.org/ <http://bruceblog.org/> > > > Twitter: http://twitter.com/brucesnyder > > > > > > > > -- > > Clebert Suconic > > > -- perl -e 'print unpack("u30","D0G)U8V4\@4VYY9&5R\"F)R=6-E+G-N>61E<D\!G;6%I;\"YC;VT*" );' ActiveMQ in Action: http://bit.ly/2je6cQ Blog: http://bsnyder.org/ <http://bruceblog.org/> Twitter: http://twitter.com/brucesnyder
