Am 2020-10-19 um 19:45 schrieb Oleg Kalnichevski:
On Mon, 2020-10-19 at 19:29 +0200, Michael Osipov wrote:
Am 2020-10-19 um 19:21 schrieb Oleg Kalnichevski:
On Mon, 2020-10-19 at 19:14 +0200, Michael Osipov wrote:
Am 2020-10-19 um 19:12 schrieb Oleg Kalnichevski:
Folks
I personally think that our project web site is an absolute
disgrace.
The terrible quality of our web site really hurts the project.
Last time we discussed the subject I swore to not touch the
retched
thing unless absolutely necessary for release publishing.
Do we want to revisit the issue or shall we keep things as they
stand?
Revisiting means a lot of work. Before we start changing content
we
should sweep everything which is not wrong or not used at all.
From
that
have a starting point for new discussion.
That is correct. I would be prepared to either do most of work
myself
or hire a designer to do that for us. The main point of contention
however was the use of markdown as the markup language for the site
and
potential loss of Maven generated content (Maven project reports).
Could everyone live with migration to Markdown and no longer using
Maven Site plugin?
Why lose? Markdown based on Flexmark can be used with the Site
plugin.
See here: https://github.com/apache/maven-site/
Two reasons:
1. We cannot have our web site updated just by accepting a PR at
GitHub. Someone would still need to run maven and publish maven stuff.
2. I am a happy Maven user when it comes to using Maven as a build tool
but Maven web publishing just does not work well for our project in my
experience.
I'd somewhat concur. When I push to maven-site, I do not run Maven.
There seems to be some process at ASF infra pushes it. I am quite
certain that this process can be reused for us here.
WDYT? Shall I ask Hervé Boutemy? He should know.
M
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
