Adding my +1 as well before closing the vote
On 2020/02/24 09:47:27, Rob Vesse wrote:
> +1
>
> Glad to see progress on this
>
> Rob
>
+1
Glad to see progress on this
Rob
On 21/02/2020, 18:38, "ajs6f" wrote:
With the same interpretation, +1, and thanks very much to Roy for looking
into this!
ajs6f
> On Feb 21, 2020, at 1:26 PM, Andy Seaborne wrote:
>
> Interpreting as a general "in
With the same interpretation, +1, and thanks very much to Roy for looking into
this!
ajs6f
> On Feb 21, 2020, at 1:26 PM, Andy Seaborne wrote:
>
> Interpreting as a general "in principle" to move website content ... no
> timeline and (obviously) subject to new information becoming available.
I like the idea of having the documentation on GitHub and separating the
javadocs from the documentation website. I have no knowledge or opinion about
mechanisms such as Hugo.
+1
Chris T
> On Feb 21, 2020, at 12:26 PM, Andy Seaborne wrote:
>
> Interpreting as a general "in principle" to
Interpreting as a general "in principle" to move website content ... no
timeline and (obviously) subject to new information becoming available.
+1
PMC - please vote and not leave to LAZY to indicate you are aware this
is work-in-progress.
Andy
On 19/02/2020 13:41, Roy Lenferink wrote:
+1 for moving to Git, no strong opinion on which site generator to use,
Jekyll, Hugo, etc. But being able to get pull requests for the docs could
increase the contributions IMO
Thanks
Bruno
On Thursday, 20 February 2020, 2:41:16 am NZDT, Roy Lenferink
wrote:
Hi Jena community,
Hi Jena community,
After last weeks proposal [1] I'd like to start a vote for moving over from the
current Apache CMS
(and SVN) to use Hugo and git :)
Short recap about Hugo: Hugo is a static site generator which is already having
more stars on
GitHub than Jekyll. It is easy to get started
