Hi Alex,
well we couldn't just copy stuff to GIT as the Apache CMS didn't seem to support Git at all and there are no plans on supporting this. The maven-site-plugin has several options for generating the site for a project. There are the usual templates that for example the maven project uses to generate its site, but that was too unsexy for a framework like Flex. So I gave the Reflow skin [1] a try and was pretty happy with this as it seems to have provided most of the things I thought I needed to port the page. It was while having my first success with the skin, that I noticed, that porting the pages to Markup was pretty easy. I bet the Apache guys internally sort of use Markup or something very similar to that. It was also about then, when I noticed that our site seems to be using bootstrap for layouting. Conveniently the reflow skin also uses bootstrap, but probably a newer version. After I customized and fine-tuned most of the page to look nice, I converted those pages, that were full of HTML markup. I had quite some spare time in my last project as they managed to supply me with work for about 10% of my time so I was able to invest that time into the website as this doesn't require you to zone-out. Here I could deal with little interruptions by my paying customer without going nuts. Generics support is on a completely different page now. I really need some exclusive flex-time for that. And I needed this functionality in general, if I wanted to auto publish the maven sites generated by sub projects (FlexJS: Compiler, Typedefs, Framework). Anyway ... the website migration from my point of view is in a state in which I won't put much effort in it as most is already done. If we decide to go down that path, it would be great if some people with more CSS experience could jump in and help finish the last styling tasks. Chris [1] http://andriusvelykis.github.io/reflow-maven-skin/ ________________________________ Von: Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 19. Oktober 2016 19:21:52 An: dev@flex.apache.org Betreff: Re: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: [Website] Progress on the Website-Generation topic On 10/19/16, 2:18 AM, "Christofer Dutz" <christofer.d...@c-ware.de> wrote: >Ok picking up this thread again ... > > >Well I think that allowing non-comitters to contribute to the page is a >pretty slim benefit. I couldn't say that we have used that even for a >single time in the past. And I think it would be good not to allow this >in general. At least I couldn't find a way to release only parts of the >site, so it's an all or nothing. And I also couldn't see any "this has >changed" so you would actually have to verify the entire page just to >make sure no one pushed anything bad. So I think it's a good thing that >non-comitters can't contribute to the site. This way we also don't have >to worry about signed ICLAs and so. "this has changed" would be on commits@. But yeah, I do not like having to push the entire site, and going through the web interface to do it. > >One thing I couldn't find in the codebase however was the footer of each >page containing the Twitter feed, the latest releases, the about flex >text and how to subscribe to mailinglists. I couldn't find this content >anywhere :-( I think that is in trunk/templates. I've been wondering why this move to Maven didn't involve just copying the templates and other files to Git. Did you try to implement a port to Bootstrap at the same time because you had to, or was it an option? > > >And I would like to state that I didn't expect this to be a race in which >the first one wins. If there are other initiatives to generating the site >in git, why not simply setup a separate branch and put that stuff in >there? I could change the buildbot job to push to "asf-site-maven" and >different solutions could co-exist. All that I want, is the ability to >produce the sites of sub-modules such as FlexJS (and it's part) >automatically. I don't think it is a race. We are just experimenting with various options. I saw an old mail where Harbs tried to get GitHub pages up. I don't know of any other current alternatives. It really is a matter of whether it is worth your time since nobody else seems to have time to help. I'm definitely not a fan of ASF CMS, I just am wondering if it truly needs replacing right now. Would it be higher impact to the project to work on Generics support instead? -Alex
