Re: git-scm.com status report

On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 02:06:16PM +0200, Lars Schneider wrote: > > I haven't ever tried to do this in the local development environment. > > The production site currently just use a cloud-hosted ES (Bonsai). They > > have free "Sandbox" plans for testing, so you could probably use that as > > a

Re: git-scm.com status report

> On 17 May 2017, at 04:03, Jeff King wrote: > > On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 09:56:37PM -0400, Samuel Lijin wrote: > >> So I've finally found the time to get everything set up (in the >> process discovering that remote_genbook2 consistently induces a >> segfault in VirtualBox's

Re: git-scm.com status report

On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 09:56:37PM -0400, Samuel Lijin wrote: > So I've finally found the time to get everything set up (in the > process discovering that remote_genbook2 consistently induces a > segfault in VirtualBox's networking driver, impressively enough) and > am taking a look at how much

Re: git-scm.com status report

On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 1:27 PM, Jeff King wrote: > On Thu, Feb 02, 2017 at 03:33:50AM +0100, Jeff King wrote: > >> We (the Git project) got control of the git-scm.com domain this year. We >> have never really had an "official" website, but I think a lot of people >> consider this

Re: git-scm.com status report

On Sat, Feb 18, 2017 at 10:27:51PM +, pedro rijo wrote: > I would say everyone did an amazing job, closing more than 150 old issues > in a single week! I think the amount of issues is finally manageable (40 > issues currently). Yes, thank you to all who have been helping. But especially you

Re: git-scm.com status report

Jeff King wrote: > I agree we should continue to serve HTTPS. The usual solution for our > use case is to stick a CDN like Cloudflare in front of GitHub Pages (and > I think we'd want to do that anyway for performance). > > I haven't done it, but there are various guides. Here's

Re: git-scm.com status report

On Thu, Feb 09, 2017 at 02:12:09AM +, brian m. carlson wrote: > My only concern with using GitHub Pages is that I don't believe it > currently supports TLS on custom domains. Since we currently have TLS > enabled, along with HTTP Strict Transport Security (as we should), such > a

Re: git-scm.com status report

On Mon, Feb 06, 2017 at 07:27:54PM +0100, Jeff King wrote: > - It's mostly silly for this to be a Rails app at all. It's a static > site which occasionally sucks in and formats new content (like the > latest git version, new manpages, etc). The intent here was to make > something

Re: git-scm.com status report

On Thu, Feb 02, 2017 at 03:33:50AM +0100, Jeff King wrote: > We (the Git project) got control of the git-scm.com domain this year. We > have never really had an "official" website, but I think a lot of people > consider this to be one. > > This is an overview of the current state, as well as

Re: git-scm.com status report

On Mon, Feb 06, 2017 at 01:41:04AM +0530, Pranit Bauva wrote: > On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 8:03 AM, Jeff King wrote: > > ## What's on the site > > > > We have the domains git-scm.com and git-scm.org (the latter we've had > > for a while). They both point to the same website, which has

Re: git-scm.com status report

Hey Peff, On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 8:03 AM, Jeff King wrote: > ## What's on the site > > We have the domains git-scm.com and git-scm.org (the latter we've had > for a while). They both point to the same website, which has general > information about Git, including: Since we have an

Re: git-scm.com status report

On Fri, Feb 03, 2017 at 09:23:33PM +, pedro rijo wrote: > Seems a good idea. I will start by going through some old prs/issues to > look for trash. If I do find some like the one I referred I will let you > know by mentioning you. After that I will have a look at simpler issues/prs. > > Let

Re: git-scm.com status report

On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 5:58 AM, Jeff King wrote: > On Thu, Feb 02, 2017 at 12:54:53AM -0600, Samuel Lijin wrote: > >> In theory, you could also dump the build artifacts to a GH Pages repo >> and host it from there, although I don't know if you would run up >> against any of the

Re: git-scm.com status report

On Thu, Feb 02, 2017 at 10:01:45PM +, pedro rijo wrote: > While I’m not experienced with Rails apps, I would like to give my > contribution to the Git project. I could help doing some kind of > triage, removing abusing PRs/issues (like > https://github.com/git/git-scm.com/pull/557 >

Re: git-scm.com status report

On Thu, Feb 02, 2017 at 12:54:53AM -0600, Samuel Lijin wrote: > In theory, you could also dump the build artifacts to a GH Pages repo > and host it from there, although I don't know if you would run up > against any of the usage limits[0]. The immediate problem I see with > that approach, though,

Re: git-scm.com status report

For anyone interested, this thread is on the HN front page right now[0]. There's one suggestion in particular that stands out to me - shifting to Digital Ocean[1], which for $240/mo offers wa more than what it sounds like the current Heroku costs are. [0]

Re: git-scm.com status report

In theory, you could also dump the build artifacts to a GH Pages repo and host it from there, although I don't know if you would run up against any of the usage limits[0]. The immediate problem I see with that approach, though, is that I have no idea how any of the dynamic stuff (e.g. search)

Re: git-scm.com status report

Jeff King wrote: > With the caveat that I know very little about web hosting, $230/mo > sounds like an awful lot for what is essentially a static web site. Yes, that's a lot. Fwiw, that covers a year of low-end VPS hosting for the main public-inbox.org/git machine + mail host