Hi Reza, We could definitely set up the publishing environment on our devicemap-vm box. The same commands from provision.sh [10] could be used for that.
To summarise, we have three options when it comes to publishing website updates with Jekyll: 1. Set up the environment on the developer's box 2. Use the Vagrant template - all developers running the VM defined by Vagrant would use the same environment 3. Configure devicemap-vm as a staging environment for the website Regards, Radu [10] - http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/devicemap/whiteboard/devicemap-site-jekyll/_vagrant/provision.sh On Tuesday, 30 December 2014, Reza Naghibi <[email protected]> wrote: > So is it not possible to get this solution hosted? > > As for the metal I own... a phone, iPad, a old mini computer, and my ec2 > micro. If we could get the solution hosted, its going to greatly lower the > barrier to push updates. Can we use the devicemap-vm? > > > > > <div>-------- Original message --------</div><div>From: Radu Cotescu < > [email protected] <javascript:;>> </div><div>Date:12/29/2014 1:48 PM > (GMT-05:00) </div><div>To: devicemap-dev <[email protected] > <javascript:;>> </div><div>Cc: Reza Naghibi <[email protected] > <javascript:;>> </div><div>Subject: Re: website prototype update > </div><div> > </div>Hi, > > The design on b.a.o is horrible. :( Leaving that aside I'd like to have > all our info organised on the same website. BTW, the b.a.o doesn't provide > any SEO AFAICS (check view-source: > https://blogs.apache.org/couchdb/entry/apache_couchdb_1_6_0). > > While I agree that editing on c.a.o is simpler, why do you think that the > Jekyll prototype comes with high costs? What are the steps in the proposed > publishing scenario that you would deem as too difficult for a bunch of > developers? > > Thanks, > Radu > > On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 8:37 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz < > [email protected] <javascript:;>> wrote: > Have you considered using https://blogs.apache.org/ for the > blogs/news/SEO side of things that your prototype seems to cover? We > can get a blog just by asking, and we could keep the main site for > more static information (and still graft your CSS on it). > > I agree that having a single website that does it all is nice, but as > I said the cost in terms of lost ease of maintenance is high, and that > gets worse as project members come and go as is often the case in our > projects. > > >
