You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@oodt.apache.org by Tom Barber <to...@meteorite.bi> on 2016/04/03 00:45:21 UTC
OODT Website Changes (Redux)
Alright folks,
Most peope who have been on the list for a while know we moved from the
most static of static websites to Apache CMS a while ago to allow for more
regular updating and maintenance of the website.
Lewis then put a bunch of work into creating a template for the CMS website
and we revamped a lot of the content, but the CMS has a bunch of issues
both in the ease of developing a website and also in maintenance so the
Infra team are retiring it.
My personal opinion(having done some of this in my day job, and discussed
similar on some other ASF projects) is we migrate the website to gitsubpub
and Jekyll.
This will give us the ability to easily stand up the existing website on
our own laptops, or development servers make changes and deploy them. Also
without the templating system that Apache CMS enforces upon you, its a far
quicker development cycle.
Of course we could just use standard HTML & Javascript, but part of the
reason I'd like to use Jekyll is the fact users can create content using
Markdown syntax instead of HTML and Javascript. Jekyll is a static blogging
platform, so its designed for frequent updating, and as people may have
noticed I've been blogging OODT stuff on my personal blog because the CMS
is a pain to update.
Has anyone got an opinion? It feels like we did stage one which was make
the website easier to update, but stage two is to make the process a lot
easier, and standardised.
Cheers
Tom
Re: OODT Website Changes (Redux)
Posted by Lewis John Mcgibbney <le...@gmail.com>.
Each module has a site package. The documentation in these packages needs
to be brought back in to the mix again as well.
On Saturday, April 2, 2016, Tom Barber <to...@meteorite.bi> wrote:
> Alright folks,
>
> Most peope who have been on the list for a while know we moved from the
> most static of static websites to Apache CMS a while ago to allow for more
> regular updating and maintenance of the website.
>
> Lewis then put a bunch of work into creating a template for the CMS website
> and we revamped a lot of the content, but the CMS has a bunch of issues
> both in the ease of developing a website and also in maintenance so the
> Infra team are retiring it.
>
> My personal opinion(having done some of this in my day job, and discussed
> similar on some other ASF projects) is we migrate the website to gitsubpub
> and Jekyll.
>
> This will give us the ability to easily stand up the existing website on
> our own laptops, or development servers make changes and deploy them. Also
> without the templating system that Apache CMS enforces upon you, its a far
> quicker development cycle.
>
> Of course we could just use standard HTML & Javascript, but part of the
> reason I'd like to use Jekyll is the fact users can create content using
> Markdown syntax instead of HTML and Javascript. Jekyll is a static blogging
> platform, so its designed for frequent updating, and as people may have
> noticed I've been blogging OODT stuff on my personal blog because the CMS
> is a pain to update.
>
> Has anyone got an opinion? It feels like we did stage one which was make
> the website easier to update, but stage two is to make the process a lot
> easier, and standardised.
>
> Cheers
>
> Tom
>
--
*Lewis*
Re: OODT Website Changes (Redux)
Posted by Lewis John Mcgibbney <le...@gmail.com>.
Yep Tom.
BOOM
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OODT/Meetups
On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 8:54 AM, Tom Barber <to...@meteorite.bi> wrote:
> Ta.
>
> Might be worth putting a few hours work in at ApacheCon with Lewis.
>
> @lewis with this and the distributed FM and stuff, might be worth putting
> together a little agenda of stuff we could plan/test/dev whilst we're
> there.
>
> Tom
>
> On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 7:05 AM, Lewis John Mcgibbney <
> lewis.mcgibbney@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Sorted
> >
> > On Wednesday, April 6, 2016, Chris Mattmann <ch...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > All of this is looking great, Tom. There’s real
> > > substance here and something for us to build on.
> > >
> > > —
> > > Chris Mattmann
> > > chris.mattmann@gmail.com <javascript:;>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 4/6/16, 7:33 PM, "Tom Barber" <tom.barber@meteorite.bi
> > <javascript:;>>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > >Alright here's a summary of today's experimentation:
> > > >
> > > >Created a basic documentation page to test out a few things. Tabs work
> > > >quite well, and kbd tags on the radix page look pretty good to attract
> > > >users. Clearly that whole section would need more work, its just a
> test
> > > bed
> > > >of ideas currently.
> > > >
> > > >http://buggtb.github.io/oodt-website/documentation.html
> > > >
> > > >Community page is also tabular, the about page is basically a 1:1 copy
> > of
> > > >the existing stuff, the team page is cool because the PMC list is
> > > generated
> > > >directly from the Apache Phonebook (I noticed the one on the main site
> > is
> > > >already out of date! ;) )
> > > >
> > > >http://buggtb.github.io/oodt-website/community.html
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >Downloads page, again, this uses a configuration parameter to
> > dynamically
> > > >generate the links to the correct version and the previous releases
> down
> > > >the right hand side, this is great for the release process as all
> > someone
> > > >has to do is when a VOTE is accepted and the mirrors are live, is
> paste
> > > >about 3 lines of code into the site and check it in, at which point
> the
> > > >downloads page is up to date once more (although we could probably
> > write a
> > > >plugin to automate this as well ;))
> > > >
> > > >http://buggtb.github.io/oodt-website/download.html
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >Anyway, like I said, work in progress, I'm soliciting feedback more
> than
> > > >anything else. In reality the site docs wouldn't live directly under
> the
> > > >components menu heading but it was a good place to put them for now,
> > also
> > > >it wouldn't take much to have them use the same stylesheets as the
> main
> > > >site and also link back to the main site as well, making them feel
> more
> > > >integrated.
> > > >
> > > >It needs more diagrams and colour, to break it up still, but I think
> as
> > a
> > > >POC it's coming along alright.
> > > >
> > > >Regards,
> > > >
> > > >Tom
> > > >
> > > >On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 6:03 PM, Lewis John Mcgibbney <
> > > >lewis.mcgibbney@gmail.com <javascript:;>> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Bingo
> > > >>
> > > >> On Wednesday, April 6, 2016, Tom Barber <tom.barber@meteorite.bi
> > > <javascript:;>> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> > Thanks Lewis! I think with stuff like this its hard to fully
> explain
> > > over
> > > >> > email without a 10000 word essay.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Anyway, I said I'd leave it but I got bored so I wondered what
> else
> > > >> Jekyll
> > > >> > could do to help us and here's a couple of things I came up with:
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > https://github.com/buggtb/oodt-website/blob/gh-pages/_config.yml#L29
> > > >> >
> > > >> > The downloads page on the CMS is manually updated, but you know
> me,
> > I
> > > >> love
> > > >> > a bit of automation, so in Jekyll we could dump the release info
> in
> > > here
> > > >> > and watch it magically build:
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/8503756/oodt-website/download.html
> > > >> >
> > > >> > That way it should be dead simple to keep the download page up to
> > > date.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > I then wondered about other stuff so I looked at the PMC list,
> it'll
> > > get
> > > >> > stale easily, so what could I do to sort that out:
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/buggtb/oodt-website/blob/gh-pages/_plugins/pcm_generator.rb
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Greps the new ASF phone book and extracts our PMC members, as I'm
> a
> > > >> giving
> > > >> > kind of guy, I'll parametrize it and Joshua or whatever can use it
> > as
> > > >> well
> > > >> > when its done.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Currently the PMC list is on the download page, ignore that it was
> > > just
> > > >> for
> > > >> > testing.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Anyway there you go. Couple more nuggets that could make the
> website
> > > >> > maintenance a whole lot simpler.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Tom
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> > On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 11:39 AM, Lewis John Mcgibbney <
> > > >> > lewis.mcgibbney@gmail.com <javascript:;> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > Hi Tom,
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 12:59 AM, Tom Barber <
> > > tom.barber@meteorite.bi <javascript:;>
> > > >> > <javascript:;>>
> > > >> > > wrote:
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > When I took over the chair from SK, my unofficial aim was to
> use
> > > this
> > > >> > > chair
> > > >> > > > period to try and get the business users involved, my day job
> > > >> requires
> > > >> > me
> > > >> > > > to drive users to our product and get them interested enough
> to
> > > test
> > > >> > it,
> > > >> > > > whilst OODT isn't commercial, ultimately the goal is the same,
> > to
> > > >> gain
> > > >> > > > users and community members, we need users, and we need users
> > who
> > > >> don't
> > > >> > > > just work in the scientific domain. Whilst the odd person
> might
> > > swing
> > > >> > by
> > > >> > > > the mailing list, in reality, 99% of users will land on the
> > > homepage,
> > > >> > and
> > > >> > > > that is the determining factor as to whether they bother to
> > > >> investigate
> > > >> > > > further. Which is why I spend a lot of time prioritising stuff
> > > that
> > > >> > > doesn't
> > > >> > > > really make a lot of sense to the rest of you! :)
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > For the record its worth me stating here that I totally
> understand
> > > your
> > > >> > > PoV. When you showed me your BI workflow examples way back
> > > @ApacheCon I
> > > >> > > realized that your use cases were different. It's very
> refreshing
> > to
> > > >> see
> > > >> > > software re-purposed or presented in a different manner. An eye
> > > opener
> > > >> so
> > > >> > > to speak.
> > > >> > > Look forward to seeing what kind of roadmap we come up with
> > > @ApacheCon
> > > >> > this
> > > >> > > year again.
> > > >> > > Ta
> > > >> > >
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> --
> > > >> *Lewis*
> > > >>
> > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> > *Lewis*
> >
>
--
*Lewis*
Re: OODT Website Changes (Redux)
Posted by Tom Barber <to...@meteorite.bi>.
Ta.
Might be worth putting a few hours work in at ApacheCon with Lewis.
@lewis with this and the distributed FM and stuff, might be worth putting
together a little agenda of stuff we could plan/test/dev whilst we're there.
Tom
On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 7:05 AM, Lewis John Mcgibbney <
lewis.mcgibbney@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sorted
>
> On Wednesday, April 6, 2016, Chris Mattmann <ch...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > All of this is looking great, Tom. There’s real
> > substance here and something for us to build on.
> >
> > —
> > Chris Mattmann
> > chris.mattmann@gmail.com <javascript:;>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On 4/6/16, 7:33 PM, "Tom Barber" <tom.barber@meteorite.bi
> <javascript:;>>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >Alright here's a summary of today's experimentation:
> > >
> > >Created a basic documentation page to test out a few things. Tabs work
> > >quite well, and kbd tags on the radix page look pretty good to attract
> > >users. Clearly that whole section would need more work, its just a test
> > bed
> > >of ideas currently.
> > >
> > >http://buggtb.github.io/oodt-website/documentation.html
> > >
> > >Community page is also tabular, the about page is basically a 1:1 copy
> of
> > >the existing stuff, the team page is cool because the PMC list is
> > generated
> > >directly from the Apache Phonebook (I noticed the one on the main site
> is
> > >already out of date! ;) )
> > >
> > >http://buggtb.github.io/oodt-website/community.html
> > >
> > >
> > >Downloads page, again, this uses a configuration parameter to
> dynamically
> > >generate the links to the correct version and the previous releases down
> > >the right hand side, this is great for the release process as all
> someone
> > >has to do is when a VOTE is accepted and the mirrors are live, is paste
> > >about 3 lines of code into the site and check it in, at which point the
> > >downloads page is up to date once more (although we could probably
> write a
> > >plugin to automate this as well ;))
> > >
> > >http://buggtb.github.io/oodt-website/download.html
> > >
> > >
> > >Anyway, like I said, work in progress, I'm soliciting feedback more than
> > >anything else. In reality the site docs wouldn't live directly under the
> > >components menu heading but it was a good place to put them for now,
> also
> > >it wouldn't take much to have them use the same stylesheets as the main
> > >site and also link back to the main site as well, making them feel more
> > >integrated.
> > >
> > >It needs more diagrams and colour, to break it up still, but I think as
> a
> > >POC it's coming along alright.
> > >
> > >Regards,
> > >
> > >Tom
> > >
> > >On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 6:03 PM, Lewis John Mcgibbney <
> > >lewis.mcgibbney@gmail.com <javascript:;>> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Bingo
> > >>
> > >> On Wednesday, April 6, 2016, Tom Barber <tom.barber@meteorite.bi
> > <javascript:;>> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > Thanks Lewis! I think with stuff like this its hard to fully explain
> > over
> > >> > email without a 10000 word essay.
> > >> >
> > >> > Anyway, I said I'd leave it but I got bored so I wondered what else
> > >> Jekyll
> > >> > could do to help us and here's a couple of things I came up with:
> > >> >
> > >> >
> https://github.com/buggtb/oodt-website/blob/gh-pages/_config.yml#L29
> > >> >
> > >> > The downloads page on the CMS is manually updated, but you know me,
> I
> > >> love
> > >> > a bit of automation, so in Jekyll we could dump the release info in
> > here
> > >> > and watch it magically build:
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/8503756/oodt-website/download.html
> > >> >
> > >> > That way it should be dead simple to keep the download page up to
> > date.
> > >> >
> > >> > I then wondered about other stuff so I looked at the PMC list, it'll
> > get
> > >> > stale easily, so what could I do to sort that out:
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >>
> >
> https://github.com/buggtb/oodt-website/blob/gh-pages/_plugins/pcm_generator.rb
> > >> >
> > >> > Greps the new ASF phone book and extracts our PMC members, as I'm a
> > >> giving
> > >> > kind of guy, I'll parametrize it and Joshua or whatever can use it
> as
> > >> well
> > >> > when its done.
> > >> >
> > >> > Currently the PMC list is on the download page, ignore that it was
> > just
> > >> for
> > >> > testing.
> > >> >
> > >> > Anyway there you go. Couple more nuggets that could make the website
> > >> > maintenance a whole lot simpler.
> > >> >
> > >> > Tom
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 11:39 AM, Lewis John Mcgibbney <
> > >> > lewis.mcgibbney@gmail.com <javascript:;> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > > Hi Tom,
> > >> > >
> > >> > > On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 12:59 AM, Tom Barber <
> > tom.barber@meteorite.bi <javascript:;>
> > >> > <javascript:;>>
> > >> > > wrote:
> > >> > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > When I took over the chair from SK, my unofficial aim was to use
> > this
> > >> > > chair
> > >> > > > period to try and get the business users involved, my day job
> > >> requires
> > >> > me
> > >> > > > to drive users to our product and get them interested enough to
> > test
> > >> > it,
> > >> > > > whilst OODT isn't commercial, ultimately the goal is the same,
> to
> > >> gain
> > >> > > > users and community members, we need users, and we need users
> who
> > >> don't
> > >> > > > just work in the scientific domain. Whilst the odd person might
> > swing
> > >> > by
> > >> > > > the mailing list, in reality, 99% of users will land on the
> > homepage,
> > >> > and
> > >> > > > that is the determining factor as to whether they bother to
> > >> investigate
> > >> > > > further. Which is why I spend a lot of time prioritising stuff
> > that
> > >> > > doesn't
> > >> > > > really make a lot of sense to the rest of you! :)
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > For the record its worth me stating here that I totally understand
> > your
> > >> > > PoV. When you showed me your BI workflow examples way back
> > @ApacheCon I
> > >> > > realized that your use cases were different. It's very refreshing
> to
> > >> see
> > >> > > software re-purposed or presented in a different manner. An eye
> > opener
> > >> so
> > >> > > to speak.
> > >> > > Look forward to seeing what kind of roadmap we come up with
> > @ApacheCon
> > >> > this
> > >> > > year again.
> > >> > > Ta
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> *Lewis*
> > >>
> >
> >
>
> --
> *Lewis*
>
Re: OODT Website Changes (Redux)
Posted by Lewis John Mcgibbney <le...@gmail.com>.
Sorted
On Wednesday, April 6, 2016, Chris Mattmann <ch...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> All of this is looking great, Tom. There’s real
> substance here and something for us to build on.
>
> —
> Chris Mattmann
> chris.mattmann@gmail.com <javascript:;>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 4/6/16, 7:33 PM, "Tom Barber" <tom.barber@meteorite.bi <javascript:;>>
> wrote:
>
> >Alright here's a summary of today's experimentation:
> >
> >Created a basic documentation page to test out a few things. Tabs work
> >quite well, and kbd tags on the radix page look pretty good to attract
> >users. Clearly that whole section would need more work, its just a test
> bed
> >of ideas currently.
> >
> >http://buggtb.github.io/oodt-website/documentation.html
> >
> >Community page is also tabular, the about page is basically a 1:1 copy of
> >the existing stuff, the team page is cool because the PMC list is
> generated
> >directly from the Apache Phonebook (I noticed the one on the main site is
> >already out of date! ;) )
> >
> >http://buggtb.github.io/oodt-website/community.html
> >
> >
> >Downloads page, again, this uses a configuration parameter to dynamically
> >generate the links to the correct version and the previous releases down
> >the right hand side, this is great for the release process as all someone
> >has to do is when a VOTE is accepted and the mirrors are live, is paste
> >about 3 lines of code into the site and check it in, at which point the
> >downloads page is up to date once more (although we could probably write a
> >plugin to automate this as well ;))
> >
> >http://buggtb.github.io/oodt-website/download.html
> >
> >
> >Anyway, like I said, work in progress, I'm soliciting feedback more than
> >anything else. In reality the site docs wouldn't live directly under the
> >components menu heading but it was a good place to put them for now, also
> >it wouldn't take much to have them use the same stylesheets as the main
> >site and also link back to the main site as well, making them feel more
> >integrated.
> >
> >It needs more diagrams and colour, to break it up still, but I think as a
> >POC it's coming along alright.
> >
> >Regards,
> >
> >Tom
> >
> >On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 6:03 PM, Lewis John Mcgibbney <
> >lewis.mcgibbney@gmail.com <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >
> >> Bingo
> >>
> >> On Wednesday, April 6, 2016, Tom Barber <tom.barber@meteorite.bi
> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Thanks Lewis! I think with stuff like this its hard to fully explain
> over
> >> > email without a 10000 word essay.
> >> >
> >> > Anyway, I said I'd leave it but I got bored so I wondered what else
> >> Jekyll
> >> > could do to help us and here's a couple of things I came up with:
> >> >
> >> > https://github.com/buggtb/oodt-website/blob/gh-pages/_config.yml#L29
> >> >
> >> > The downloads page on the CMS is manually updated, but you know me, I
> >> love
> >> > a bit of automation, so in Jekyll we could dump the release info in
> here
> >> > and watch it magically build:
> >> >
> >> >
> https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/8503756/oodt-website/download.html
> >> >
> >> > That way it should be dead simple to keep the download page up to
> date.
> >> >
> >> > I then wondered about other stuff so I looked at the PMC list, it'll
> get
> >> > stale easily, so what could I do to sort that out:
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> https://github.com/buggtb/oodt-website/blob/gh-pages/_plugins/pcm_generator.rb
> >> >
> >> > Greps the new ASF phone book and extracts our PMC members, as I'm a
> >> giving
> >> > kind of guy, I'll parametrize it and Joshua or whatever can use it as
> >> well
> >> > when its done.
> >> >
> >> > Currently the PMC list is on the download page, ignore that it was
> just
> >> for
> >> > testing.
> >> >
> >> > Anyway there you go. Couple more nuggets that could make the website
> >> > maintenance a whole lot simpler.
> >> >
> >> > Tom
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 11:39 AM, Lewis John Mcgibbney <
> >> > lewis.mcgibbney@gmail.com <javascript:;> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > Hi Tom,
> >> > >
> >> > > On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 12:59 AM, Tom Barber <
> tom.barber@meteorite.bi <javascript:;>
> >> > <javascript:;>>
> >> > > wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > When I took over the chair from SK, my unofficial aim was to use
> this
> >> > > chair
> >> > > > period to try and get the business users involved, my day job
> >> requires
> >> > me
> >> > > > to drive users to our product and get them interested enough to
> test
> >> > it,
> >> > > > whilst OODT isn't commercial, ultimately the goal is the same, to
> >> gain
> >> > > > users and community members, we need users, and we need users who
> >> don't
> >> > > > just work in the scientific domain. Whilst the odd person might
> swing
> >> > by
> >> > > > the mailing list, in reality, 99% of users will land on the
> homepage,
> >> > and
> >> > > > that is the determining factor as to whether they bother to
> >> investigate
> >> > > > further. Which is why I spend a lot of time prioritising stuff
> that
> >> > > doesn't
> >> > > > really make a lot of sense to the rest of you! :)
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > For the record its worth me stating here that I totally understand
> your
> >> > > PoV. When you showed me your BI workflow examples way back
> @ApacheCon I
> >> > > realized that your use cases were different. It's very refreshing to
> >> see
> >> > > software re-purposed or presented in a different manner. An eye
> opener
> >> so
> >> > > to speak.
> >> > > Look forward to seeing what kind of roadmap we come up with
> @ApacheCon
> >> > this
> >> > > year again.
> >> > > Ta
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> *Lewis*
> >>
>
>
--
*Lewis*
Re: OODT Website Changes (Redux)
Posted by Chris Mattmann <ch...@gmail.com>.
All of this is looking great, Tom. There’s real
substance here and something for us to build on.
—
Chris Mattmann
chris.mattmann@gmail.com
On 4/6/16, 7:33 PM, "Tom Barber" <to...@meteorite.bi> wrote:
>Alright here's a summary of today's experimentation:
>
>Created a basic documentation page to test out a few things. Tabs work
>quite well, and kbd tags on the radix page look pretty good to attract
>users. Clearly that whole section would need more work, its just a test bed
>of ideas currently.
>
>http://buggtb.github.io/oodt-website/documentation.html
>
>Community page is also tabular, the about page is basically a 1:1 copy of
>the existing stuff, the team page is cool because the PMC list is generated
>directly from the Apache Phonebook (I noticed the one on the main site is
>already out of date! ;) )
>
>http://buggtb.github.io/oodt-website/community.html
>
>
>Downloads page, again, this uses a configuration parameter to dynamically
>generate the links to the correct version and the previous releases down
>the right hand side, this is great for the release process as all someone
>has to do is when a VOTE is accepted and the mirrors are live, is paste
>about 3 lines of code into the site and check it in, at which point the
>downloads page is up to date once more (although we could probably write a
>plugin to automate this as well ;))
>
>http://buggtb.github.io/oodt-website/download.html
>
>
>Anyway, like I said, work in progress, I'm soliciting feedback more than
>anything else. In reality the site docs wouldn't live directly under the
>components menu heading but it was a good place to put them for now, also
>it wouldn't take much to have them use the same stylesheets as the main
>site and also link back to the main site as well, making them feel more
>integrated.
>
>It needs more diagrams and colour, to break it up still, but I think as a
>POC it's coming along alright.
>
>Regards,
>
>Tom
>
>On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 6:03 PM, Lewis John Mcgibbney <
>lewis.mcgibbney@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Bingo
>>
>> On Wednesday, April 6, 2016, Tom Barber <to...@meteorite.bi> wrote:
>>
>> > Thanks Lewis! I think with stuff like this its hard to fully explain over
>> > email without a 10000 word essay.
>> >
>> > Anyway, I said I'd leave it but I got bored so I wondered what else
>> Jekyll
>> > could do to help us and here's a couple of things I came up with:
>> >
>> > https://github.com/buggtb/oodt-website/blob/gh-pages/_config.yml#L29
>> >
>> > The downloads page on the CMS is manually updated, but you know me, I
>> love
>> > a bit of automation, so in Jekyll we could dump the release info in here
>> > and watch it magically build:
>> >
>> > https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/8503756/oodt-website/download.html
>> >
>> > That way it should be dead simple to keep the download page up to date.
>> >
>> > I then wondered about other stuff so I looked at the PMC list, it'll get
>> > stale easily, so what could I do to sort that out:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> https://github.com/buggtb/oodt-website/blob/gh-pages/_plugins/pcm_generator.rb
>> >
>> > Greps the new ASF phone book and extracts our PMC members, as I'm a
>> giving
>> > kind of guy, I'll parametrize it and Joshua or whatever can use it as
>> well
>> > when its done.
>> >
>> > Currently the PMC list is on the download page, ignore that it was just
>> for
>> > testing.
>> >
>> > Anyway there you go. Couple more nuggets that could make the website
>> > maintenance a whole lot simpler.
>> >
>> > Tom
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 11:39 AM, Lewis John Mcgibbney <
>> > lewis.mcgibbney@gmail.com <javascript:;>> wrote:
>> >
>> > > Hi Tom,
>> > >
>> > > On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 12:59 AM, Tom Barber <tom.barber@meteorite.bi
>> > <javascript:;>>
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > >
>> > > > When I took over the chair from SK, my unofficial aim was to use this
>> > > chair
>> > > > period to try and get the business users involved, my day job
>> requires
>> > me
>> > > > to drive users to our product and get them interested enough to test
>> > it,
>> > > > whilst OODT isn't commercial, ultimately the goal is the same, to
>> gain
>> > > > users and community members, we need users, and we need users who
>> don't
>> > > > just work in the scientific domain. Whilst the odd person might swing
>> > by
>> > > > the mailing list, in reality, 99% of users will land on the homepage,
>> > and
>> > > > that is the determining factor as to whether they bother to
>> investigate
>> > > > further. Which is why I spend a lot of time prioritising stuff that
>> > > doesn't
>> > > > really make a lot of sense to the rest of you! :)
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > For the record its worth me stating here that I totally understand your
>> > > PoV. When you showed me your BI workflow examples way back @ApacheCon I
>> > > realized that your use cases were different. It's very refreshing to
>> see
>> > > software re-purposed or presented in a different manner. An eye opener
>> so
>> > > to speak.
>> > > Look forward to seeing what kind of roadmap we come up with @ApacheCon
>> > this
>> > > year again.
>> > > Ta
>> > >
>> >
>>
>>
>> --
>> *Lewis*
>>
Re: OODT Website Changes (Redux)
Posted by Tom Barber <to...@meteorite.bi>.
Alright here's a summary of today's experimentation:
Created a basic documentation page to test out a few things. Tabs work
quite well, and kbd tags on the radix page look pretty good to attract
users. Clearly that whole section would need more work, its just a test bed
of ideas currently.
http://buggtb.github.io/oodt-website/documentation.html
Community page is also tabular, the about page is basically a 1:1 copy of
the existing stuff, the team page is cool because the PMC list is generated
directly from the Apache Phonebook (I noticed the one on the main site is
already out of date! ;) )
http://buggtb.github.io/oodt-website/community.html
Downloads page, again, this uses a configuration parameter to dynamically
generate the links to the correct version and the previous releases down
the right hand side, this is great for the release process as all someone
has to do is when a VOTE is accepted and the mirrors are live, is paste
about 3 lines of code into the site and check it in, at which point the
downloads page is up to date once more (although we could probably write a
plugin to automate this as well ;))
http://buggtb.github.io/oodt-website/download.html
Anyway, like I said, work in progress, I'm soliciting feedback more than
anything else. In reality the site docs wouldn't live directly under the
components menu heading but it was a good place to put them for now, also
it wouldn't take much to have them use the same stylesheets as the main
site and also link back to the main site as well, making them feel more
integrated.
It needs more diagrams and colour, to break it up still, but I think as a
POC it's coming along alright.
Regards,
Tom
On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 6:03 PM, Lewis John Mcgibbney <
lewis.mcgibbney@gmail.com> wrote:
> Bingo
>
> On Wednesday, April 6, 2016, Tom Barber <to...@meteorite.bi> wrote:
>
> > Thanks Lewis! I think with stuff like this its hard to fully explain over
> > email without a 10000 word essay.
> >
> > Anyway, I said I'd leave it but I got bored so I wondered what else
> Jekyll
> > could do to help us and here's a couple of things I came up with:
> >
> > https://github.com/buggtb/oodt-website/blob/gh-pages/_config.yml#L29
> >
> > The downloads page on the CMS is manually updated, but you know me, I
> love
> > a bit of automation, so in Jekyll we could dump the release info in here
> > and watch it magically build:
> >
> > https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/8503756/oodt-website/download.html
> >
> > That way it should be dead simple to keep the download page up to date.
> >
> > I then wondered about other stuff so I looked at the PMC list, it'll get
> > stale easily, so what could I do to sort that out:
> >
> >
> >
> https://github.com/buggtb/oodt-website/blob/gh-pages/_plugins/pcm_generator.rb
> >
> > Greps the new ASF phone book and extracts our PMC members, as I'm a
> giving
> > kind of guy, I'll parametrize it and Joshua or whatever can use it as
> well
> > when its done.
> >
> > Currently the PMC list is on the download page, ignore that it was just
> for
> > testing.
> >
> > Anyway there you go. Couple more nuggets that could make the website
> > maintenance a whole lot simpler.
> >
> > Tom
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 11:39 AM, Lewis John Mcgibbney <
> > lewis.mcgibbney@gmail.com <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Tom,
> > >
> > > On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 12:59 AM, Tom Barber <tom.barber@meteorite.bi
> > <javascript:;>>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > When I took over the chair from SK, my unofficial aim was to use this
> > > chair
> > > > period to try and get the business users involved, my day job
> requires
> > me
> > > > to drive users to our product and get them interested enough to test
> > it,
> > > > whilst OODT isn't commercial, ultimately the goal is the same, to
> gain
> > > > users and community members, we need users, and we need users who
> don't
> > > > just work in the scientific domain. Whilst the odd person might swing
> > by
> > > > the mailing list, in reality, 99% of users will land on the homepage,
> > and
> > > > that is the determining factor as to whether they bother to
> investigate
> > > > further. Which is why I spend a lot of time prioritising stuff that
> > > doesn't
> > > > really make a lot of sense to the rest of you! :)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > For the record its worth me stating here that I totally understand your
> > > PoV. When you showed me your BI workflow examples way back @ApacheCon I
> > > realized that your use cases were different. It's very refreshing to
> see
> > > software re-purposed or presented in a different manner. An eye opener
> so
> > > to speak.
> > > Look forward to seeing what kind of roadmap we come up with @ApacheCon
> > this
> > > year again.
> > > Ta
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
> *Lewis*
>
Re: OODT Website Changes (Redux)
Posted by Lewis John Mcgibbney <le...@gmail.com>.
Bingo
On Wednesday, April 6, 2016, Tom Barber <to...@meteorite.bi> wrote:
> Thanks Lewis! I think with stuff like this its hard to fully explain over
> email without a 10000 word essay.
>
> Anyway, I said I'd leave it but I got bored so I wondered what else Jekyll
> could do to help us and here's a couple of things I came up with:
>
> https://github.com/buggtb/oodt-website/blob/gh-pages/_config.yml#L29
>
> The downloads page on the CMS is manually updated, but you know me, I love
> a bit of automation, so in Jekyll we could dump the release info in here
> and watch it magically build:
>
> https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/8503756/oodt-website/download.html
>
> That way it should be dead simple to keep the download page up to date.
>
> I then wondered about other stuff so I looked at the PMC list, it'll get
> stale easily, so what could I do to sort that out:
>
>
> https://github.com/buggtb/oodt-website/blob/gh-pages/_plugins/pcm_generator.rb
>
> Greps the new ASF phone book and extracts our PMC members, as I'm a giving
> kind of guy, I'll parametrize it and Joshua or whatever can use it as well
> when its done.
>
> Currently the PMC list is on the download page, ignore that it was just for
> testing.
>
> Anyway there you go. Couple more nuggets that could make the website
> maintenance a whole lot simpler.
>
> Tom
>
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 11:39 AM, Lewis John Mcgibbney <
> lewis.mcgibbney@gmail.com <javascript:;>> wrote:
>
> > Hi Tom,
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 12:59 AM, Tom Barber <tom.barber@meteorite.bi
> <javascript:;>>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > When I took over the chair from SK, my unofficial aim was to use this
> > chair
> > > period to try and get the business users involved, my day job requires
> me
> > > to drive users to our product and get them interested enough to test
> it,
> > > whilst OODT isn't commercial, ultimately the goal is the same, to gain
> > > users and community members, we need users, and we need users who don't
> > > just work in the scientific domain. Whilst the odd person might swing
> by
> > > the mailing list, in reality, 99% of users will land on the homepage,
> and
> > > that is the determining factor as to whether they bother to investigate
> > > further. Which is why I spend a lot of time prioritising stuff that
> > doesn't
> > > really make a lot of sense to the rest of you! :)
> > >
> > >
> > For the record its worth me stating here that I totally understand your
> > PoV. When you showed me your BI workflow examples way back @ApacheCon I
> > realized that your use cases were different. It's very refreshing to see
> > software re-purposed or presented in a different manner. An eye opener so
> > to speak.
> > Look forward to seeing what kind of roadmap we come up with @ApacheCon
> this
> > year again.
> > Ta
> >
>
--
*Lewis*
Re: OODT Website Changes (Redux)
Posted by Tom Barber <to...@meteorite.bi>.
Thanks Lewis! I think with stuff like this its hard to fully explain over
email without a 10000 word essay.
Anyway, I said I'd leave it but I got bored so I wondered what else Jekyll
could do to help us and here's a couple of things I came up with:
https://github.com/buggtb/oodt-website/blob/gh-pages/_config.yml#L29
The downloads page on the CMS is manually updated, but you know me, I love
a bit of automation, so in Jekyll we could dump the release info in here
and watch it magically build:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/8503756/oodt-website/download.html
That way it should be dead simple to keep the download page up to date.
I then wondered about other stuff so I looked at the PMC list, it'll get
stale easily, so what could I do to sort that out:
https://github.com/buggtb/oodt-website/blob/gh-pages/_plugins/pcm_generator.rb
Greps the new ASF phone book and extracts our PMC members, as I'm a giving
kind of guy, I'll parametrize it and Joshua or whatever can use it as well
when its done.
Currently the PMC list is on the download page, ignore that it was just for
testing.
Anyway there you go. Couple more nuggets that could make the website
maintenance a whole lot simpler.
Tom
On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 11:39 AM, Lewis John Mcgibbney <
lewis.mcgibbney@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Tom,
>
> On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 12:59 AM, Tom Barber <to...@meteorite.bi>
> wrote:
>
> >
> > When I took over the chair from SK, my unofficial aim was to use this
> chair
> > period to try and get the business users involved, my day job requires me
> > to drive users to our product and get them interested enough to test it,
> > whilst OODT isn't commercial, ultimately the goal is the same, to gain
> > users and community members, we need users, and we need users who don't
> > just work in the scientific domain. Whilst the odd person might swing by
> > the mailing list, in reality, 99% of users will land on the homepage, and
> > that is the determining factor as to whether they bother to investigate
> > further. Which is why I spend a lot of time prioritising stuff that
> doesn't
> > really make a lot of sense to the rest of you! :)
> >
> >
> For the record its worth me stating here that I totally understand your
> PoV. When you showed me your BI workflow examples way back @ApacheCon I
> realized that your use cases were different. It's very refreshing to see
> software re-purposed or presented in a different manner. An eye opener so
> to speak.
> Look forward to seeing what kind of roadmap we come up with @ApacheCon this
> year again.
> Ta
>
Re: OODT Website Changes (Redux)
Posted by Lewis John Mcgibbney <le...@gmail.com>.
Hi Tom,
On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 12:59 AM, Tom Barber <to...@meteorite.bi> wrote:
>
> When I took over the chair from SK, my unofficial aim was to use this chair
> period to try and get the business users involved, my day job requires me
> to drive users to our product and get them interested enough to test it,
> whilst OODT isn't commercial, ultimately the goal is the same, to gain
> users and community members, we need users, and we need users who don't
> just work in the scientific domain. Whilst the odd person might swing by
> the mailing list, in reality, 99% of users will land on the homepage, and
> that is the determining factor as to whether they bother to investigate
> further. Which is why I spend a lot of time prioritising stuff that doesn't
> really make a lot of sense to the rest of you! :)
>
>
For the record its worth me stating here that I totally understand your
PoV. When you showed me your BI workflow examples way back @ApacheCon I
realized that your use cases were different. It's very refreshing to see
software re-purposed or presented in a different manner. An eye opener so
to speak.
Look forward to seeing what kind of roadmap we come up with @ApacheCon this
year again.
Ta
Re: OODT Website Changes (Redux)
Posted by Tom Barber <to...@meteorite.bi>.
Thanks chaps, like I said, just playing around with some layouting ideas.
I guess, knowing how long it took me to get an understanding of OODT and
what it can do for business users, that I want to make sure drive by
visitors can get an understanding as to what OODT can do for them, without
them getting thoroughly lost in a minefield of acronyms and text.
Chris mentioned no one apart from me has a massive need to rewrite the
website, I agree, and its hardly a surprise, you all come from a scientific
background and use the platform regularly, you're also consumers so your
outlook on the project is different.
When I took over the chair from SK, my unofficial aim was to use this chair
period to try and get the business users involved, my day job requires me
to drive users to our product and get them interested enough to test it,
whilst OODT isn't commercial, ultimately the goal is the same, to gain
users and community members, we need users, and we need users who don't
just work in the scientific domain. Whilst the odd person might swing by
the mailing list, in reality, 99% of users will land on the homepage, and
that is the determining factor as to whether they bother to investigate
further. Which is why I spend a lot of time prioritising stuff that doesn't
really make a lot of sense to the rest of you! :)
I'm not asking you folks to actually do anything, just as long as there in
consensus and agreement, that is good enough, but similarly I don't want to
spend ages doing something that will get undone, which is why this
discussion is taking place.
---
Lewis, good to hear about the mobile stuff, I hadn't got that far yet,
bootstrap should keep it pretty much cross device compatible, but these
things always take a bit of tweaking.
Tom
On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 1:08 AM, Lewis John Mcgibbney <
lewis.mcgibbney@gmail.com> wrote:
> Rendering beautifully on mobile. This is neat as.
>
> On Tuesday, April 5, 2016, Mattmann, Chris A (3980) <
> chris.a.mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov> wrote:
>
> > LOVE the style and of course GH pages and the work there
> > is superior to the CMS.
> >
> > Let’s explore this..great start.
> >
> > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
> > Chief Architect
> > Instrument Software and Science Data Systems Section (398)
> > NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
> > Office: 168-519, Mailstop: 168-527
> > Email: chris.a.mattmann@nasa.gov <javascript:;>
> > WWW: http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
> > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > Director, Information Retrieval and Data Science Group (IRDS)
> > Adjunct Associate Professor, Computer Science Department
> > University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
> > WWW: http://irds.usc.edu/
> > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On 4/5/16, 7:06 PM, "Tom Barber" <tom.barber@meteorite.bi
> <javascript:;>>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >Okay, spent an hour hacking around ideas tonight, just to get a feel for
> > >things.
> > >
> > >http://buggtb.github.io/oodt-website/
> > >
> > >I've only messed around with a frontpage and basic blog listing. You can
> > >see what i'm trying to do in breaking it up a bunch, I still want to do
> > >make the text easier to digest, its all a bit "wordy" for a front page,
> > but
> > >broken up with an architecture diagram I stole from one of Chris' slides
> > >gives non users a quick visual representation of what it is.
> > >
> > >Of course I could have done that in CMS, but I can assure you it was 100
> > >times quicker locally and pushing the changes up, but as I discussed the
> > >other day that's not the whole reason, as I was wanting something that
> > >makes it easier for non technical users to contribute news and blog
> stuff
> > >to.
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://raw.githubusercontent.com/buggtb/oodt-website/master/_posts/2016-01-04-oodt-011-released.md
> > >
> > >
> > >They are pretty straightforward, and as we found the other day, there
> is a
> > >github based editor for these things for those who don't want to mess
> with
> > >markdown. You can also submit blog posts in html and they'll be rendered
> > >just fine.
> > >
> > >I'm not trying to undo the work that was done during the rewrite and
> Chris
> > >mentioned his affection for SK's old site, I liked it to, my only gripe
> > >with that was the inability for easy fixes from users! Which is resolved
> > >sorta with CMS but personally I think its even easier for users with a
> > >github fork -> PR setup, which is basically what would happen with
> > >gitsubpub.
> > >
> > >https://github.com/buggtb/oodt-website
> > >
> > >I'll probably leave it at that for a while, I just wanted to play with
> > some
> > >stuff and share it back.
> > >
> > >Tom
> > >
> > >On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 10:02 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (3980) <
> > >chris.a.mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov <javascript:;>> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Understood, OK Tom.
> > >>
> > >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > >> Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
> > >> Chief Architect
> > >> Instrument Software and Science Data Systems Section (398)
> > >> NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
> > >> Office: 168-519, Mailstop: 168-527
> > >> Email: chris.a.mattmann@nasa.gov <javascript:;>
> > >> WWW: http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
> > >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > >> Director, Information Retrieval and Data Science Group (IRDS)
> > >> Adjunct Associate Professor, Computer Science Department
> > >> University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
> > >> WWW: http://irds.usc.edu/
> > >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On 4/5/16, 12:10 PM, "Tom Barber" <tom.barber@meteorite.bi
> > <javascript:;>> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> >Yeah, I'm not suggesting we switch any time soon.
> > >> >
> > >> >My viewpoint is thus: we can do a better job with content, look and
> > feel
> > >> >and the maintenance side.
> > >> >
> > >> >Personally, I find the CMS hard to use, maybe its just me, who knows.
> > So,
> > >> >my suggestion is purely do some POC work to come up with what may, or
> > may
> > >> >not be a better solution. If the workflow and tech is acceptable,
> then
> > >> >build out the site in the new tech, it can be demoed on GH pages or
> > >> >wherever in the interim, and finally, when we're happy with the
> > content,
> > >> >the theme and the ability to update it, then... and only then do we
> > change
> > >> >it.
> > >> >
> > >> >From my own opinion, I want to put some more free time into improving
> > the
> > >> >site, but I feel that it would be a much quicker and more efficient
> > >> process
> > >> >if the stuff wasn't inside CMS, that is all.
> > >> >
> > >> >Tom
> > >> >
> > >> >On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 2:27 PM, Chris Mattmann <
> > chris.mattmann@gmail.com <javascript:;>>
> > >> >wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> >> Tom, my comment here is that we tried to do the exact
> > >> >> same thing in Summer 2014 on XDATA. Just note that
> > >> >> “dummy site” is now what we have in our operational
> > >> >> site for Apache OODT. I think we have just only recently
> > >> >> come to a point where it’s more stable (we don’t have
> > >> >> people like Sebb coming externally saying our links don’t
> > >> >> work).
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Now you are proposing to change the site again, which
> > >> >> design wise is fine by me (though shows how much I know
> > >> >> since I liked SK’s old site even - and the new site started
> > >> >> by the next generation also looks nice too). However,
> > >> >> stability wise it’s not fine by me unless *the entire site*
> > >> >> is migrated, and until we run a link checker against it
> > >> >> long before turning on the switch to move over to it.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> No one is clamoring for a website redesign - it’s mostly
> > >> >> been discussion led by you and commented on by Val, and
> > >> >> Lewis.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> My 2c.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Cheers,
> > >> >> Chris
> > >> >>
> > >> >> —
> > >> >> Chris Mattmann
> > >> >> chris.mattmann@gmail.com <javascript:;>
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> On 4/5/16, 8:55 AM, "Tom Barber" <tom.barber@meteorite.bi
> > <javascript:;>> wrote:
> > >> >>
> > >> >> >Okay here's what I propose. Apache CMS will be retired, not any
> time
> > >> >> soon, but at some point in the medium term future. ASF Infra offer
> > >> >> gitsubpub/svnsubpub as the standard for website publishing and
> we(I?)
> > >> want
> > >> >> something more useable for non webdevs. Thats not necessarily code
> > free,
> > >> >> but certainly an easy process for people to upload new content.
> > >> >> >My suggestion is that I knock up a dummy replacement site in
> Jekyll,
> > >> that
> > >> >> migrates across a couple of the pages and some dummy blog content,
> > and
> > >> I'll
> > >> >> come back and demonstrate the user publishing flow, at which point
> we
> > >> can
> > >> >> have a discussion as to whether its something we pursue, or not.
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >Sound like a plan?
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >Of course in the mean time, if anyone else has any suggestions
> for a
> > >> >> "dynamic" static website, speak up!
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >Tom
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 10:09 AM, Tom Barber <
> > tom.barber@meteorite.bi <javascript:;>>
> > >> >> wrote:
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >Indeed Val
> > >> >> >Ease of use is something I'm trying to achieve because it makes it
> > >> easier
> > >> >> for everyone to help maintain our resources with minimum effort.
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >In Jekyll (if that was a chosen solution Markdown is entirely
> > optional,
> > >> >> you can just as easily publish HTML content as markdown, I just
> > >> mentioned
> > >> >> it as an easy barrier to get people to write blog posts, but there
> > are a
> > >> >> bunch of HTML generating apps on the market, of you could use the
> WP
> > >> >> editor, and hit the source button and copy the content from WP to
> > >> Jekyll,
> > >> >> not great always the most obvious workflow, but would do the job.
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >Also, not tried it, but Prose.io gives you a MD WYSIWYG editor for
> > >> >> github, so assuming we were running the fork -> pull request model,
> > you
> > >> >> could edit the OODT site using Prose on Github and just push over a
> > pull
> > >> >> request with the changes made.
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >Prose seems to support basic formatting and inserting of images,
> > once a
> > >> >> website template is designed I would expect contributers to do any
> > more
> > >> >> anyway, unless they wanted to, content should be about writing a
> blog
> > >> post
> > >> >> of page and hitting the go button.
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >A quick google also reveals some Word to Markdown tools, I've not
> > used
> > >> >> them either, but I guess they would do a job.
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >Tom
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 1:30 AM, Mallder, Valerie <
> > >> >> Valerie.Mallder@jhuapl.edu <javascript:;>> wrote:
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >You are absolutely right, in markdown you would be missing images.
> > My
> > >> >> objection to using markdown is having to learn a new language
> syntax
> > for
> > >> >> styling the text. I have no objection to having a static site. I
> just
> > >> want
> > >> >> it to be easy to use and not require that you have to spend time
> > >> learning
> > >> >> something new. If it takes too much time to do (because you have to
> > >> learn
> > >> >> some new stuff in order to do it) you may find that people will put
> > it
> > >> on
> > >> >> their todo list but never end up getting to it because they are too
> > busy
> > >> >> working on higher priority tasks in their day jobs. I think your
> > primary
> > >> >> goal (when choosing what you want to do) should be to add as little
> > >> work as
> > >> >> possible to people's plates. That's all. If there are any WYSIWYG
> > >> editors
> > >> >> out there that have the option to do a "save as" to markdown format
> > that
> > >> >> would be optimal. But I don't know if there are any.
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >Sent with Good (www.good.com <http://www.good.com>)
> > >> >> >________________________________
> > >> >> >From: Tom Barber <tom.barber@meteorite.bi <javascript:;>>
> > >> >> >Sent: Saturday, April 2, 2016 7:17:42 PM
> > >> >> >To: dev@oodt.apache.org <javascript:;>
> > >> >> >Subject: Re: OODT Website Changes (Redux)
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >Also, (playing devils advocate) if it's a word doc why can't you
> > just
> > >> copy
> > >> >> >and paste it into a markdown file? The only major thing you'd be
> > >> missing
> > >> >> >is any images :)
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >Another plus to a static blogging site is, if you decide it sucks
> > in a
> > >> few
> > >> >> >years time, you just have some html to move somewhere else, it's
> > >> just a
> > >> >> >static website, if you decide WordPress sucked or infra said
> they'd
> > >> host
> > >> >> >it, then down the line changed their mind, you'd have a much
> bigger
> > >> task
> > >> >> >on your hands.
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >Tom
> > >> >> >On 3 Apr 2016 00:07, "Tom Barber" <tom.barber@meteorite.bi
> > <javascript:;>> wrote:
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >> Hey Val,
> > >> >> >>
> > >> >> >> You can write HTML and a bunch of other stuff, but I'm trying to
> > >> offer
> > >> >> up
> > >> >> >> a solution that is easy for people to deploy and develop on
> > outside
> > >> of
> > >> >> the
> > >> >> >> Apache infrastructure, and markdown, being just text is easy to
> > >> deploy.
> > >> >> >> Also Wordpress etc require databases and backing infra where as
> > >> Jekyll
> > >> >> is
> > >> >> >> purely static HTML by the time it is deployed.
> > >> >> >>
> > >> >> >> I have no idea if Infra would support wordpress anyway, I doubt
> > it,
> > >> when
> > >> >> >> they said they were retiring Apache CMS, it wasn't like "oh but
> > don't
> > >> >> worry
> > >> >> >> folks, you can stand up a wordpress website", I could be wrong,
> > but
> > >> that
> > >> >> >> was my impression.
> > >> >> >>
> > >> >> >> At the end of a day, creating a blog post that looks like:
> > >> >> >>
> > >> >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >>
> >
> https://raw.githubusercontent.com/maciakl/Sample-Jekyll-Site/master/_posts/2012-02-10-code-snippets.markdown
> > >> >> >>
> > >> >> >> is much quicker than writing a bunch of HTML, but the Apache CMS
> > is
> > >> >> also a
> > >> >> >> bit of a lie, because if you think you don't have to write HTML
> > >> because
> > >> >> its
> > >> >> >> a CMS, you're sorely mistaken! ;)
> > >> >> >>
> > >> >> >> Tom
> > >> >> >>
> > >> >> >>
> > >> >> >> On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 12:00 AM, Mallder, Valerie <
> > >> >> >> Valerie.Mallder@jhuapl.edu <javascript:;>> wrote:
> > >> >> >>
> > >> >> >>> I am not familiar with Jekyll, but I disagree with using
> > markdown.
> > >> Why
> > >> >> >>> must we write in any kind of markup language? That would suck.
> > Why
> > >> not
> > >> >> just
> > >> >> >>> use a better CMS? There are plenty out there. I personally
> > develop
> > >> >> websites
> > >> >> >>> in Wordpress. It's free and very easy to use. You can edit
> posts
> > in
> > >> a
> > >> >> >>> WYSIWYG editor. You can also copy-paste from a Word doc into
> the
> > >> post.
> > >> >> Just
> > >> >> >>> my opinion.
> > >> >> >>>
> > >> >> >>>
> > >> >> >>>
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >>> Sent with Good (www.good.com <http://www.good.com><
> > >> http://www.good.com
> > >> >> >)
> > >> >> >>> ________________________________
> > >> >> >>> From: Tom Barber <tom.barber@meteorite.bi <javascript:;>>
> > >> >> >>> Sent: Saturday, April 2, 2016 6:45:21 PM
> > >> >> >>> To: dev@oodt.apache.org <javascript:;>
> > >> >> >>> Subject: OODT Website Changes (Redux)
> > >> >> >>>
> > >> >> >>> Alright folks,
> > >> >> >>>
> > >> >> >>> Most peope who have been on the list for a while know we moved
> > from
> > >> the
> > >> >> >>> most static of static websites to Apache CMS a while ago to
> allow
> > >> for
> > >> >> more
> > >> >> >>> regular updating and maintenance of the website.
> > >> >> >>>
> > >> >> >>> Lewis then put a bunch of work into creating a template for the
> > CMS
> > >> >> >>> website
> > >> >> >>> and we revamped a lot of the content, but the CMS has a bunch
> of
> > >> issues
> > >> >> >>> both in the ease of developing a website and also in
> maintenance
> > so
> > >> the
> > >> >> >>> Infra team are retiring it.
> > >> >> >>>
> > >> >> >>> My personal opinion(having done some of this in my day job, and
> > >> >> discussed
> > >> >> >>> similar on some other ASF projects) is we migrate the website
> to
> > >> >> gitsubpub
> > >> >> >>> and Jekyll.
> > >> >> >>>
> > >> >> >>> This will give us the ability to easily stand up the existing
> > >> website
> > >> >> on
> > >> >> >>> our own laptops, or development servers make changes and deploy
> > >> them.
> > >> >> Also
> > >> >> >>> without the templating system that Apache CMS enforces upon
> you,
> > >> its a
> > >> >> >>> far
> > >> >> >>> quicker development cycle.
> > >> >> >>>
> > >> >> >>> Of course we could just use standard HTML & Javascript, but
> part
> > of
> > >> the
> > >> >> >>> reason I'd like to use Jekyll is the fact users can create
> > content
> > >> >> using
> > >> >> >>> Markdown syntax instead of HTML and Javascript. Jekyll is a
> > static
> > >> >> >>> blogging
> > >> >> >>> platform, so its designed for frequent updating, and as people
> > may
> > >> have
> > >> >> >>> noticed I've been blogging OODT stuff on my personal blog
> because
> > >> the
> > >> >> CMS
> > >> >> >>> is a pain to update.
> > >> >> >>>
> > >> >> >>> Has anyone got an opinion? It feels like we did stage one which
> > was
> > >> >> make
> > >> >> >>> the website easier to update, but stage two is to make the
> > process a
> > >> >> lot
> > >> >> >>> easier, and standardised.
> > >> >> >>>
> > >> >> >>> Cheers
> > >> >> >>>
> > >> >> >>> Tom
> > >> >> >>>
> > >> >> >>
> > >> >> >>
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >>
> >
>
>
> --
> *Lewis*
>
Re: OODT Website Changes (Redux)
Posted by Lewis John Mcgibbney <le...@gmail.com>.
Rendering beautifully on mobile. This is neat as.
On Tuesday, April 5, 2016, Mattmann, Chris A (3980) <
chris.a.mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov> wrote:
> LOVE the style and of course GH pages and the work there
> is superior to the CMS.
>
> Let’s explore this..great start.
>
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
> Chief Architect
> Instrument Software and Science Data Systems Section (398)
> NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
> Office: 168-519, Mailstop: 168-527
> Email: chris.a.mattmann@nasa.gov <javascript:;>
> WWW: http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> Director, Information Retrieval and Data Science Group (IRDS)
> Adjunct Associate Professor, Computer Science Department
> University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
> WWW: http://irds.usc.edu/
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 4/5/16, 7:06 PM, "Tom Barber" <tom.barber@meteorite.bi <javascript:;>>
> wrote:
>
> >Okay, spent an hour hacking around ideas tonight, just to get a feel for
> >things.
> >
> >http://buggtb.github.io/oodt-website/
> >
> >I've only messed around with a frontpage and basic blog listing. You can
> >see what i'm trying to do in breaking it up a bunch, I still want to do
> >make the text easier to digest, its all a bit "wordy" for a front page,
> but
> >broken up with an architecture diagram I stole from one of Chris' slides
> >gives non users a quick visual representation of what it is.
> >
> >Of course I could have done that in CMS, but I can assure you it was 100
> >times quicker locally and pushing the changes up, but as I discussed the
> >other day that's not the whole reason, as I was wanting something that
> >makes it easier for non technical users to contribute news and blog stuff
> >to.
> >
> >
> https://raw.githubusercontent.com/buggtb/oodt-website/master/_posts/2016-01-04-oodt-011-released.md
> >
> >
> >They are pretty straightforward, and as we found the other day, there is a
> >github based editor for these things for those who don't want to mess with
> >markdown. You can also submit blog posts in html and they'll be rendered
> >just fine.
> >
> >I'm not trying to undo the work that was done during the rewrite and Chris
> >mentioned his affection for SK's old site, I liked it to, my only gripe
> >with that was the inability for easy fixes from users! Which is resolved
> >sorta with CMS but personally I think its even easier for users with a
> >github fork -> PR setup, which is basically what would happen with
> >gitsubpub.
> >
> >https://github.com/buggtb/oodt-website
> >
> >I'll probably leave it at that for a while, I just wanted to play with
> some
> >stuff and share it back.
> >
> >Tom
> >
> >On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 10:02 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (3980) <
> >chris.a.mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >
> >> Understood, OK Tom.
> >>
> >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >> Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
> >> Chief Architect
> >> Instrument Software and Science Data Systems Section (398)
> >> NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
> >> Office: 168-519, Mailstop: 168-527
> >> Email: chris.a.mattmann@nasa.gov <javascript:;>
> >> WWW: http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
> >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >> Director, Information Retrieval and Data Science Group (IRDS)
> >> Adjunct Associate Professor, Computer Science Department
> >> University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
> >> WWW: http://irds.usc.edu/
> >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 4/5/16, 12:10 PM, "Tom Barber" <tom.barber@meteorite.bi
> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Yeah, I'm not suggesting we switch any time soon.
> >> >
> >> >My viewpoint is thus: we can do a better job with content, look and
> feel
> >> >and the maintenance side.
> >> >
> >> >Personally, I find the CMS hard to use, maybe its just me, who knows.
> So,
> >> >my suggestion is purely do some POC work to come up with what may, or
> may
> >> >not be a better solution. If the workflow and tech is acceptable, then
> >> >build out the site in the new tech, it can be demoed on GH pages or
> >> >wherever in the interim, and finally, when we're happy with the
> content,
> >> >the theme and the ability to update it, then... and only then do we
> change
> >> >it.
> >> >
> >> >From my own opinion, I want to put some more free time into improving
> the
> >> >site, but I feel that it would be a much quicker and more efficient
> >> process
> >> >if the stuff wasn't inside CMS, that is all.
> >> >
> >> >Tom
> >> >
> >> >On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 2:27 PM, Chris Mattmann <
> chris.mattmann@gmail.com <javascript:;>>
> >> >wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Tom, my comment here is that we tried to do the exact
> >> >> same thing in Summer 2014 on XDATA. Just note that
> >> >> “dummy site” is now what we have in our operational
> >> >> site for Apache OODT. I think we have just only recently
> >> >> come to a point where it’s more stable (we don’t have
> >> >> people like Sebb coming externally saying our links don’t
> >> >> work).
> >> >>
> >> >> Now you are proposing to change the site again, which
> >> >> design wise is fine by me (though shows how much I know
> >> >> since I liked SK’s old site even - and the new site started
> >> >> by the next generation also looks nice too). However,
> >> >> stability wise it’s not fine by me unless *the entire site*
> >> >> is migrated, and until we run a link checker against it
> >> >> long before turning on the switch to move over to it.
> >> >>
> >> >> No one is clamoring for a website redesign - it’s mostly
> >> >> been discussion led by you and commented on by Val, and
> >> >> Lewis.
> >> >>
> >> >> My 2c.
> >> >>
> >> >> Cheers,
> >> >> Chris
> >> >>
> >> >> —
> >> >> Chris Mattmann
> >> >> chris.mattmann@gmail.com <javascript:;>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> On 4/5/16, 8:55 AM, "Tom Barber" <tom.barber@meteorite.bi
> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >Okay here's what I propose. Apache CMS will be retired, not any time
> >> >> soon, but at some point in the medium term future. ASF Infra offer
> >> >> gitsubpub/svnsubpub as the standard for website publishing and we(I?)
> >> want
> >> >> something more useable for non webdevs. Thats not necessarily code
> free,
> >> >> but certainly an easy process for people to upload new content.
> >> >> >My suggestion is that I knock up a dummy replacement site in Jekyll,
> >> that
> >> >> migrates across a couple of the pages and some dummy blog content,
> and
> >> I'll
> >> >> come back and demonstrate the user publishing flow, at which point we
> >> can
> >> >> have a discussion as to whether its something we pursue, or not.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Sound like a plan?
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Of course in the mean time, if anyone else has any suggestions for a
> >> >> "dynamic" static website, speak up!
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Tom
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 10:09 AM, Tom Barber <
> tom.barber@meteorite.bi <javascript:;>>
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Indeed Val
> >> >> >Ease of use is something I'm trying to achieve because it makes it
> >> easier
> >> >> for everyone to help maintain our resources with minimum effort.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >In Jekyll (if that was a chosen solution Markdown is entirely
> optional,
> >> >> you can just as easily publish HTML content as markdown, I just
> >> mentioned
> >> >> it as an easy barrier to get people to write blog posts, but there
> are a
> >> >> bunch of HTML generating apps on the market, of you could use the WP
> >> >> editor, and hit the source button and copy the content from WP to
> >> Jekyll,
> >> >> not great always the most obvious workflow, but would do the job.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Also, not tried it, but Prose.io gives you a MD WYSIWYG editor for
> >> >> github, so assuming we were running the fork -> pull request model,
> you
> >> >> could edit the OODT site using Prose on Github and just push over a
> pull
> >> >> request with the changes made.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Prose seems to support basic formatting and inserting of images,
> once a
> >> >> website template is designed I would expect contributers to do any
> more
> >> >> anyway, unless they wanted to, content should be about writing a blog
> >> post
> >> >> of page and hitting the go button.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >A quick google also reveals some Word to Markdown tools, I've not
> used
> >> >> them either, but I guess they would do a job.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Tom
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 1:30 AM, Mallder, Valerie <
> >> >> Valerie.Mallder@jhuapl.edu <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >You are absolutely right, in markdown you would be missing images.
> My
> >> >> objection to using markdown is having to learn a new language syntax
> for
> >> >> styling the text. I have no objection to having a static site. I just
> >> want
> >> >> it to be easy to use and not require that you have to spend time
> >> learning
> >> >> something new. If it takes too much time to do (because you have to
> >> learn
> >> >> some new stuff in order to do it) you may find that people will put
> it
> >> on
> >> >> their todo list but never end up getting to it because they are too
> busy
> >> >> working on higher priority tasks in their day jobs. I think your
> primary
> >> >> goal (when choosing what you want to do) should be to add as little
> >> work as
> >> >> possible to people's plates. That's all. If there are any WYSIWYG
> >> editors
> >> >> out there that have the option to do a "save as" to markdown format
> that
> >> >> would be optimal. But I don't know if there are any.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Sent with Good (www.good.com <http://www.good.com>)
> >> >> >________________________________
> >> >> >From: Tom Barber <tom.barber@meteorite.bi <javascript:;>>
> >> >> >Sent: Saturday, April 2, 2016 7:17:42 PM
> >> >> >To: dev@oodt.apache.org <javascript:;>
> >> >> >Subject: Re: OODT Website Changes (Redux)
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Also, (playing devils advocate) if it's a word doc why can't you
> just
> >> copy
> >> >> >and paste it into a markdown file? The only major thing you'd be
> >> missing
> >> >> >is any images :)
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Another plus to a static blogging site is, if you decide it sucks
> in a
> >> few
> >> >> >years time, you just have some html to move somewhere else, it's
> >> just a
> >> >> >static website, if you decide WordPress sucked or infra said they'd
> >> host
> >> >> >it, then down the line changed their mind, you'd have a much bigger
> >> task
> >> >> >on your hands.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Tom
> >> >> >On 3 Apr 2016 00:07, "Tom Barber" <tom.barber@meteorite.bi
> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> Hey Val,
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> You can write HTML and a bunch of other stuff, but I'm trying to
> >> offer
> >> >> up
> >> >> >> a solution that is easy for people to deploy and develop on
> outside
> >> of
> >> >> the
> >> >> >> Apache infrastructure, and markdown, being just text is easy to
> >> deploy.
> >> >> >> Also Wordpress etc require databases and backing infra where as
> >> Jekyll
> >> >> is
> >> >> >> purely static HTML by the time it is deployed.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> I have no idea if Infra would support wordpress anyway, I doubt
> it,
> >> when
> >> >> >> they said they were retiring Apache CMS, it wasn't like "oh but
> don't
> >> >> worry
> >> >> >> folks, you can stand up a wordpress website", I could be wrong,
> but
> >> that
> >> >> >> was my impression.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> At the end of a day, creating a blog post that looks like:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >>
> >>
> https://raw.githubusercontent.com/maciakl/Sample-Jekyll-Site/master/_posts/2012-02-10-code-snippets.markdown
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> is much quicker than writing a bunch of HTML, but the Apache CMS
> is
> >> >> also a
> >> >> >> bit of a lie, because if you think you don't have to write HTML
> >> because
> >> >> its
> >> >> >> a CMS, you're sorely mistaken! ;)
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Tom
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 12:00 AM, Mallder, Valerie <
> >> >> >> Valerie.Mallder@jhuapl.edu <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>> I am not familiar with Jekyll, but I disagree with using
> markdown.
> >> Why
> >> >> >>> must we write in any kind of markup language? That would suck.
> Why
> >> not
> >> >> just
> >> >> >>> use a better CMS? There are plenty out there. I personally
> develop
> >> >> websites
> >> >> >>> in Wordpress. It's free and very easy to use. You can edit posts
> in
> >> a
> >> >> >>> WYSIWYG editor. You can also copy-paste from a Word doc into the
> >> post.
> >> >> Just
> >> >> >>> my opinion.
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >>> Sent with Good (www.good.com <http://www.good.com><
> >> http://www.good.com
> >> >> >)
> >> >> >>> ________________________________
> >> >> >>> From: Tom Barber <tom.barber@meteorite.bi <javascript:;>>
> >> >> >>> Sent: Saturday, April 2, 2016 6:45:21 PM
> >> >> >>> To: dev@oodt.apache.org <javascript:;>
> >> >> >>> Subject: OODT Website Changes (Redux)
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>> Alright folks,
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>> Most peope who have been on the list for a while know we moved
> from
> >> the
> >> >> >>> most static of static websites to Apache CMS a while ago to allow
> >> for
> >> >> more
> >> >> >>> regular updating and maintenance of the website.
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>> Lewis then put a bunch of work into creating a template for the
> CMS
> >> >> >>> website
> >> >> >>> and we revamped a lot of the content, but the CMS has a bunch of
> >> issues
> >> >> >>> both in the ease of developing a website and also in maintenance
> so
> >> the
> >> >> >>> Infra team are retiring it.
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>> My personal opinion(having done some of this in my day job, and
> >> >> discussed
> >> >> >>> similar on some other ASF projects) is we migrate the website to
> >> >> gitsubpub
> >> >> >>> and Jekyll.
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>> This will give us the ability to easily stand up the existing
> >> website
> >> >> on
> >> >> >>> our own laptops, or development servers make changes and deploy
> >> them.
> >> >> Also
> >> >> >>> without the templating system that Apache CMS enforces upon you,
> >> its a
> >> >> >>> far
> >> >> >>> quicker development cycle.
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>> Of course we could just use standard HTML & Javascript, but part
> of
> >> the
> >> >> >>> reason I'd like to use Jekyll is the fact users can create
> content
> >> >> using
> >> >> >>> Markdown syntax instead of HTML and Javascript. Jekyll is a
> static
> >> >> >>> blogging
> >> >> >>> platform, so its designed for frequent updating, and as people
> may
> >> have
> >> >> >>> noticed I've been blogging OODT stuff on my personal blog because
> >> the
> >> >> CMS
> >> >> >>> is a pain to update.
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>> Has anyone got an opinion? It feels like we did stage one which
> was
> >> >> make
> >> >> >>> the website easier to update, but stage two is to make the
> process a
> >> >> lot
> >> >> >>> easier, and standardised.
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>> Cheers
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>> Tom
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >>
>
--
*Lewis*
Re: OODT Website Changes (Redux)
Posted by "Mattmann, Chris A (3980)" <ch...@jpl.nasa.gov>.
LOVE the style and of course GH pages and the work there
is superior to the CMS.
Let’s explore this..great start.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
Chief Architect
Instrument Software and Science Data Systems Section (398)
NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
Office: 168-519, Mailstop: 168-527
Email: chris.a.mattmann@nasa.gov
WWW: http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Director, Information Retrieval and Data Science Group (IRDS)
Adjunct Associate Professor, Computer Science Department
University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
WWW: http://irds.usc.edu/
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
On 4/5/16, 7:06 PM, "Tom Barber" <to...@meteorite.bi> wrote:
>Okay, spent an hour hacking around ideas tonight, just to get a feel for
>things.
>
>http://buggtb.github.io/oodt-website/
>
>I've only messed around with a frontpage and basic blog listing. You can
>see what i'm trying to do in breaking it up a bunch, I still want to do
>make the text easier to digest, its all a bit "wordy" for a front page, but
>broken up with an architecture diagram I stole from one of Chris' slides
>gives non users a quick visual representation of what it is.
>
>Of course I could have done that in CMS, but I can assure you it was 100
>times quicker locally and pushing the changes up, but as I discussed the
>other day that's not the whole reason, as I was wanting something that
>makes it easier for non technical users to contribute news and blog stuff
>to.
>
>https://raw.githubusercontent.com/buggtb/oodt-website/master/_posts/2016-01-04-oodt-011-released.md
>
>
>They are pretty straightforward, and as we found the other day, there is a
>github based editor for these things for those who don't want to mess with
>markdown. You can also submit blog posts in html and they'll be rendered
>just fine.
>
>I'm not trying to undo the work that was done during the rewrite and Chris
>mentioned his affection for SK's old site, I liked it to, my only gripe
>with that was the inability for easy fixes from users! Which is resolved
>sorta with CMS but personally I think its even easier for users with a
>github fork -> PR setup, which is basically what would happen with
>gitsubpub.
>
>https://github.com/buggtb/oodt-website
>
>I'll probably leave it at that for a while, I just wanted to play with some
>stuff and share it back.
>
>Tom
>
>On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 10:02 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (3980) <
>chris.a.mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov> wrote:
>
>> Understood, OK Tom.
>>
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
>> Chief Architect
>> Instrument Software and Science Data Systems Section (398)
>> NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
>> Office: 168-519, Mailstop: 168-527
>> Email: chris.a.mattmann@nasa.gov
>> WWW: http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> Director, Information Retrieval and Data Science Group (IRDS)
>> Adjunct Associate Professor, Computer Science Department
>> University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
>> WWW: http://irds.usc.edu/
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 4/5/16, 12:10 PM, "Tom Barber" <to...@meteorite.bi> wrote:
>>
>> >Yeah, I'm not suggesting we switch any time soon.
>> >
>> >My viewpoint is thus: we can do a better job with content, look and feel
>> >and the maintenance side.
>> >
>> >Personally, I find the CMS hard to use, maybe its just me, who knows. So,
>> >my suggestion is purely do some POC work to come up with what may, or may
>> >not be a better solution. If the workflow and tech is acceptable, then
>> >build out the site in the new tech, it can be demoed on GH pages or
>> >wherever in the interim, and finally, when we're happy with the content,
>> >the theme and the ability to update it, then... and only then do we change
>> >it.
>> >
>> >From my own opinion, I want to put some more free time into improving the
>> >site, but I feel that it would be a much quicker and more efficient
>> process
>> >if the stuff wasn't inside CMS, that is all.
>> >
>> >Tom
>> >
>> >On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 2:27 PM, Chris Mattmann <ch...@gmail.com>
>> >wrote:
>> >
>> >> Tom, my comment here is that we tried to do the exact
>> >> same thing in Summer 2014 on XDATA. Just note that
>> >> “dummy site” is now what we have in our operational
>> >> site for Apache OODT. I think we have just only recently
>> >> come to a point where it’s more stable (we don’t have
>> >> people like Sebb coming externally saying our links don’t
>> >> work).
>> >>
>> >> Now you are proposing to change the site again, which
>> >> design wise is fine by me (though shows how much I know
>> >> since I liked SK’s old site even - and the new site started
>> >> by the next generation also looks nice too). However,
>> >> stability wise it’s not fine by me unless *the entire site*
>> >> is migrated, and until we run a link checker against it
>> >> long before turning on the switch to move over to it.
>> >>
>> >> No one is clamoring for a website redesign - it’s mostly
>> >> been discussion led by you and commented on by Val, and
>> >> Lewis.
>> >>
>> >> My 2c.
>> >>
>> >> Cheers,
>> >> Chris
>> >>
>> >> —
>> >> Chris Mattmann
>> >> chris.mattmann@gmail.com
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On 4/5/16, 8:55 AM, "Tom Barber" <to...@meteorite.bi> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >Okay here's what I propose. Apache CMS will be retired, not any time
>> >> soon, but at some point in the medium term future. ASF Infra offer
>> >> gitsubpub/svnsubpub as the standard for website publishing and we(I?)
>> want
>> >> something more useable for non webdevs. Thats not necessarily code free,
>> >> but certainly an easy process for people to upload new content.
>> >> >My suggestion is that I knock up a dummy replacement site in Jekyll,
>> that
>> >> migrates across a couple of the pages and some dummy blog content, and
>> I'll
>> >> come back and demonstrate the user publishing flow, at which point we
>> can
>> >> have a discussion as to whether its something we pursue, or not.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >Sound like a plan?
>> >> >
>> >> >Of course in the mean time, if anyone else has any suggestions for a
>> >> "dynamic" static website, speak up!
>> >> >
>> >> >Tom
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 10:09 AM, Tom Barber <to...@meteorite.bi>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >Indeed Val
>> >> >Ease of use is something I'm trying to achieve because it makes it
>> easier
>> >> for everyone to help maintain our resources with minimum effort.
>> >> >
>> >> >In Jekyll (if that was a chosen solution Markdown is entirely optional,
>> >> you can just as easily publish HTML content as markdown, I just
>> mentioned
>> >> it as an easy barrier to get people to write blog posts, but there are a
>> >> bunch of HTML generating apps on the market, of you could use the WP
>> >> editor, and hit the source button and copy the content from WP to
>> Jekyll,
>> >> not great always the most obvious workflow, but would do the job.
>> >> >
>> >> >Also, not tried it, but Prose.io gives you a MD WYSIWYG editor for
>> >> github, so assuming we were running the fork -> pull request model, you
>> >> could edit the OODT site using Prose on Github and just push over a pull
>> >> request with the changes made.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >Prose seems to support basic formatting and inserting of images, once a
>> >> website template is designed I would expect contributers to do any more
>> >> anyway, unless they wanted to, content should be about writing a blog
>> post
>> >> of page and hitting the go button.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >A quick google also reveals some Word to Markdown tools, I've not used
>> >> them either, but I guess they would do a job.
>> >> >
>> >> >Tom
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 1:30 AM, Mallder, Valerie <
>> >> Valerie.Mallder@jhuapl.edu> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >You are absolutely right, in markdown you would be missing images. My
>> >> objection to using markdown is having to learn a new language syntax for
>> >> styling the text. I have no objection to having a static site. I just
>> want
>> >> it to be easy to use and not require that you have to spend time
>> learning
>> >> something new. If it takes too much time to do (because you have to
>> learn
>> >> some new stuff in order to do it) you may find that people will put it
>> on
>> >> their todo list but never end up getting to it because they are too busy
>> >> working on higher priority tasks in their day jobs. I think your primary
>> >> goal (when choosing what you want to do) should be to add as little
>> work as
>> >> possible to people's plates. That's all. If there are any WYSIWYG
>> editors
>> >> out there that have the option to do a "save as" to markdown format that
>> >> would be optimal. But I don't know if there are any.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >Sent with Good (www.good.com <http://www.good.com>)
>> >> >________________________________
>> >> >From: Tom Barber <to...@meteorite.bi>
>> >> >Sent: Saturday, April 2, 2016 7:17:42 PM
>> >> >To: dev@oodt.apache.org
>> >> >Subject: Re: OODT Website Changes (Redux)
>> >> >
>> >> >Also, (playing devils advocate) if it's a word doc why can't you just
>> copy
>> >> >and paste it into a markdown file? The only major thing you'd be
>> missing
>> >> >is any images :)
>> >> >
>> >> >Another plus to a static blogging site is, if you decide it sucks in a
>> few
>> >> >years time, you just have some html to move somewhere else, it's
>> just a
>> >> >static website, if you decide WordPress sucked or infra said they'd
>> host
>> >> >it, then down the line changed their mind, you'd have a much bigger
>> task
>> >> >on your hands.
>> >> >
>> >> >Tom
>> >> >On 3 Apr 2016 00:07, "Tom Barber" <to...@meteorite.bi> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> Hey Val,
>> >> >>
>> >> >> You can write HTML and a bunch of other stuff, but I'm trying to
>> offer
>> >> up
>> >> >> a solution that is easy for people to deploy and develop on outside
>> of
>> >> the
>> >> >> Apache infrastructure, and markdown, being just text is easy to
>> deploy.
>> >> >> Also Wordpress etc require databases and backing infra where as
>> Jekyll
>> >> is
>> >> >> purely static HTML by the time it is deployed.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I have no idea if Infra would support wordpress anyway, I doubt it,
>> when
>> >> >> they said they were retiring Apache CMS, it wasn't like "oh but don't
>> >> worry
>> >> >> folks, you can stand up a wordpress website", I could be wrong, but
>> that
>> >> >> was my impression.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> At the end of a day, creating a blog post that looks like:
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >>
>> https://raw.githubusercontent.com/maciakl/Sample-Jekyll-Site/master/_posts/2012-02-10-code-snippets.markdown
>> >> >>
>> >> >> is much quicker than writing a bunch of HTML, but the Apache CMS is
>> >> also a
>> >> >> bit of a lie, because if you think you don't have to write HTML
>> because
>> >> its
>> >> >> a CMS, you're sorely mistaken! ;)
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Tom
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 12:00 AM, Mallder, Valerie <
>> >> >> Valerie.Mallder@jhuapl.edu> wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >>> I am not familiar with Jekyll, but I disagree with using markdown.
>> Why
>> >> >>> must we write in any kind of markup language? That would suck. Why
>> not
>> >> just
>> >> >>> use a better CMS? There are plenty out there. I personally develop
>> >> websites
>> >> >>> in Wordpress. It's free and very easy to use. You can edit posts in
>> a
>> >> >>> WYSIWYG editor. You can also copy-paste from a Word doc into the
>> post.
>> >> Just
>> >> >>> my opinion.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >>> Sent with Good (www.good.com <http://www.good.com><
>> http://www.good.com
>> >> >)
>> >> >>> ________________________________
>> >> >>> From: Tom Barber <to...@meteorite.bi>
>> >> >>> Sent: Saturday, April 2, 2016 6:45:21 PM
>> >> >>> To: dev@oodt.apache.org
>> >> >>> Subject: OODT Website Changes (Redux)
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Alright folks,
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Most peope who have been on the list for a while know we moved from
>> the
>> >> >>> most static of static websites to Apache CMS a while ago to allow
>> for
>> >> more
>> >> >>> regular updating and maintenance of the website.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Lewis then put a bunch of work into creating a template for the CMS
>> >> >>> website
>> >> >>> and we revamped a lot of the content, but the CMS has a bunch of
>> issues
>> >> >>> both in the ease of developing a website and also in maintenance so
>> the
>> >> >>> Infra team are retiring it.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> My personal opinion(having done some of this in my day job, and
>> >> discussed
>> >> >>> similar on some other ASF projects) is we migrate the website to
>> >> gitsubpub
>> >> >>> and Jekyll.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> This will give us the ability to easily stand up the existing
>> website
>> >> on
>> >> >>> our own laptops, or development servers make changes and deploy
>> them.
>> >> Also
>> >> >>> without the templating system that Apache CMS enforces upon you,
>> its a
>> >> >>> far
>> >> >>> quicker development cycle.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Of course we could just use standard HTML & Javascript, but part of
>> the
>> >> >>> reason I'd like to use Jekyll is the fact users can create content
>> >> using
>> >> >>> Markdown syntax instead of HTML and Javascript. Jekyll is a static
>> >> >>> blogging
>> >> >>> platform, so its designed for frequent updating, and as people may
>> have
>> >> >>> noticed I've been blogging OODT stuff on my personal blog because
>> the
>> >> CMS
>> >> >>> is a pain to update.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Has anyone got an opinion? It feels like we did stage one which was
>> >> make
>> >> >>> the website easier to update, but stage two is to make the process a
>> >> lot
>> >> >>> easier, and standardised.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Cheers
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Tom
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>>
Re: OODT Website Changes (Redux)
Posted by Tom Barber <to...@meteorite.bi>.
Okay, spent an hour hacking around ideas tonight, just to get a feel for
things.
http://buggtb.github.io/oodt-website/
I've only messed around with a frontpage and basic blog listing. You can
see what i'm trying to do in breaking it up a bunch, I still want to do
make the text easier to digest, its all a bit "wordy" for a front page, but
broken up with an architecture diagram I stole from one of Chris' slides
gives non users a quick visual representation of what it is.
Of course I could have done that in CMS, but I can assure you it was 100
times quicker locally and pushing the changes up, but as I discussed the
other day that's not the whole reason, as I was wanting something that
makes it easier for non technical users to contribute news and blog stuff
to.
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/buggtb/oodt-website/master/_posts/2016-01-04-oodt-011-released.md
They are pretty straightforward, and as we found the other day, there is a
github based editor for these things for those who don't want to mess with
markdown. You can also submit blog posts in html and they'll be rendered
just fine.
I'm not trying to undo the work that was done during the rewrite and Chris
mentioned his affection for SK's old site, I liked it to, my only gripe
with that was the inability for easy fixes from users! Which is resolved
sorta with CMS but personally I think its even easier for users with a
github fork -> PR setup, which is basically what would happen with
gitsubpub.
https://github.com/buggtb/oodt-website
I'll probably leave it at that for a while, I just wanted to play with some
stuff and share it back.
Tom
On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 10:02 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (3980) <
chris.a.mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov> wrote:
> Understood, OK Tom.
>
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
> Chief Architect
> Instrument Software and Science Data Systems Section (398)
> NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
> Office: 168-519, Mailstop: 168-527
> Email: chris.a.mattmann@nasa.gov
> WWW: http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> Director, Information Retrieval and Data Science Group (IRDS)
> Adjunct Associate Professor, Computer Science Department
> University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
> WWW: http://irds.usc.edu/
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 4/5/16, 12:10 PM, "Tom Barber" <to...@meteorite.bi> wrote:
>
> >Yeah, I'm not suggesting we switch any time soon.
> >
> >My viewpoint is thus: we can do a better job with content, look and feel
> >and the maintenance side.
> >
> >Personally, I find the CMS hard to use, maybe its just me, who knows. So,
> >my suggestion is purely do some POC work to come up with what may, or may
> >not be a better solution. If the workflow and tech is acceptable, then
> >build out the site in the new tech, it can be demoed on GH pages or
> >wherever in the interim, and finally, when we're happy with the content,
> >the theme and the ability to update it, then... and only then do we change
> >it.
> >
> >From my own opinion, I want to put some more free time into improving the
> >site, but I feel that it would be a much quicker and more efficient
> process
> >if the stuff wasn't inside CMS, that is all.
> >
> >Tom
> >
> >On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 2:27 PM, Chris Mattmann <ch...@gmail.com>
> >wrote:
> >
> >> Tom, my comment here is that we tried to do the exact
> >> same thing in Summer 2014 on XDATA. Just note that
> >> “dummy site” is now what we have in our operational
> >> site for Apache OODT. I think we have just only recently
> >> come to a point where it’s more stable (we don’t have
> >> people like Sebb coming externally saying our links don’t
> >> work).
> >>
> >> Now you are proposing to change the site again, which
> >> design wise is fine by me (though shows how much I know
> >> since I liked SK’s old site even - and the new site started
> >> by the next generation also looks nice too). However,
> >> stability wise it’s not fine by me unless *the entire site*
> >> is migrated, and until we run a link checker against it
> >> long before turning on the switch to move over to it.
> >>
> >> No one is clamoring for a website redesign - it’s mostly
> >> been discussion led by you and commented on by Val, and
> >> Lewis.
> >>
> >> My 2c.
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >> Chris
> >>
> >> —
> >> Chris Mattmann
> >> chris.mattmann@gmail.com
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 4/5/16, 8:55 AM, "Tom Barber" <to...@meteorite.bi> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Okay here's what I propose. Apache CMS will be retired, not any time
> >> soon, but at some point in the medium term future. ASF Infra offer
> >> gitsubpub/svnsubpub as the standard for website publishing and we(I?)
> want
> >> something more useable for non webdevs. Thats not necessarily code free,
> >> but certainly an easy process for people to upload new content.
> >> >My suggestion is that I knock up a dummy replacement site in Jekyll,
> that
> >> migrates across a couple of the pages and some dummy blog content, and
> I'll
> >> come back and demonstrate the user publishing flow, at which point we
> can
> >> have a discussion as to whether its something we pursue, or not.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >Sound like a plan?
> >> >
> >> >Of course in the mean time, if anyone else has any suggestions for a
> >> "dynamic" static website, speak up!
> >> >
> >> >Tom
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 10:09 AM, Tom Barber <to...@meteorite.bi>
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >Indeed Val
> >> >Ease of use is something I'm trying to achieve because it makes it
> easier
> >> for everyone to help maintain our resources with minimum effort.
> >> >
> >> >In Jekyll (if that was a chosen solution Markdown is entirely optional,
> >> you can just as easily publish HTML content as markdown, I just
> mentioned
> >> it as an easy barrier to get people to write blog posts, but there are a
> >> bunch of HTML generating apps on the market, of you could use the WP
> >> editor, and hit the source button and copy the content from WP to
> Jekyll,
> >> not great always the most obvious workflow, but would do the job.
> >> >
> >> >Also, not tried it, but Prose.io gives you a MD WYSIWYG editor for
> >> github, so assuming we were running the fork -> pull request model, you
> >> could edit the OODT site using Prose on Github and just push over a pull
> >> request with the changes made.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >Prose seems to support basic formatting and inserting of images, once a
> >> website template is designed I would expect contributers to do any more
> >> anyway, unless they wanted to, content should be about writing a blog
> post
> >> of page and hitting the go button.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >A quick google also reveals some Word to Markdown tools, I've not used
> >> them either, but I guess they would do a job.
> >> >
> >> >Tom
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 1:30 AM, Mallder, Valerie <
> >> Valerie.Mallder@jhuapl.edu> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >You are absolutely right, in markdown you would be missing images. My
> >> objection to using markdown is having to learn a new language syntax for
> >> styling the text. I have no objection to having a static site. I just
> want
> >> it to be easy to use and not require that you have to spend time
> learning
> >> something new. If it takes too much time to do (because you have to
> learn
> >> some new stuff in order to do it) you may find that people will put it
> on
> >> their todo list but never end up getting to it because they are too busy
> >> working on higher priority tasks in their day jobs. I think your primary
> >> goal (when choosing what you want to do) should be to add as little
> work as
> >> possible to people's plates. That's all. If there are any WYSIWYG
> editors
> >> out there that have the option to do a "save as" to markdown format that
> >> would be optimal. But I don't know if there are any.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >Sent with Good (www.good.com <http://www.good.com>)
> >> >________________________________
> >> >From: Tom Barber <to...@meteorite.bi>
> >> >Sent: Saturday, April 2, 2016 7:17:42 PM
> >> >To: dev@oodt.apache.org
> >> >Subject: Re: OODT Website Changes (Redux)
> >> >
> >> >Also, (playing devils advocate) if it's a word doc why can't you just
> copy
> >> >and paste it into a markdown file? The only major thing you'd be
> missing
> >> >is any images :)
> >> >
> >> >Another plus to a static blogging site is, if you decide it sucks in a
> few
> >> >years time, you just have some html to move somewhere else, it's
> just a
> >> >static website, if you decide WordPress sucked or infra said they'd
> host
> >> >it, then down the line changed their mind, you'd have a much bigger
> task
> >> >on your hands.
> >> >
> >> >Tom
> >> >On 3 Apr 2016 00:07, "Tom Barber" <to...@meteorite.bi> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Hey Val,
> >> >>
> >> >> You can write HTML and a bunch of other stuff, but I'm trying to
> offer
> >> up
> >> >> a solution that is easy for people to deploy and develop on outside
> of
> >> the
> >> >> Apache infrastructure, and markdown, being just text is easy to
> deploy.
> >> >> Also Wordpress etc require databases and backing infra where as
> Jekyll
> >> is
> >> >> purely static HTML by the time it is deployed.
> >> >>
> >> >> I have no idea if Infra would support wordpress anyway, I doubt it,
> when
> >> >> they said they were retiring Apache CMS, it wasn't like "oh but don't
> >> worry
> >> >> folks, you can stand up a wordpress website", I could be wrong, but
> that
> >> >> was my impression.
> >> >>
> >> >> At the end of a day, creating a blog post that looks like:
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >>
> https://raw.githubusercontent.com/maciakl/Sample-Jekyll-Site/master/_posts/2012-02-10-code-snippets.markdown
> >> >>
> >> >> is much quicker than writing a bunch of HTML, but the Apache CMS is
> >> also a
> >> >> bit of a lie, because if you think you don't have to write HTML
> because
> >> its
> >> >> a CMS, you're sorely mistaken! ;)
> >> >>
> >> >> Tom
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 12:00 AM, Mallder, Valerie <
> >> >> Valerie.Mallder@jhuapl.edu> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> I am not familiar with Jekyll, but I disagree with using markdown.
> Why
> >> >>> must we write in any kind of markup language? That would suck. Why
> not
> >> just
> >> >>> use a better CMS? There are plenty out there. I personally develop
> >> websites
> >> >>> in Wordpress. It's free and very easy to use. You can edit posts in
> a
> >> >>> WYSIWYG editor. You can also copy-paste from a Word doc into the
> post.
> >> Just
> >> >>> my opinion.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >>> Sent with Good (www.good.com <http://www.good.com><
> http://www.good.com
> >> >)
> >> >>> ________________________________
> >> >>> From: Tom Barber <to...@meteorite.bi>
> >> >>> Sent: Saturday, April 2, 2016 6:45:21 PM
> >> >>> To: dev@oodt.apache.org
> >> >>> Subject: OODT Website Changes (Redux)
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Alright folks,
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Most peope who have been on the list for a while know we moved from
> the
> >> >>> most static of static websites to Apache CMS a while ago to allow
> for
> >> more
> >> >>> regular updating and maintenance of the website.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Lewis then put a bunch of work into creating a template for the CMS
> >> >>> website
> >> >>> and we revamped a lot of the content, but the CMS has a bunch of
> issues
> >> >>> both in the ease of developing a website and also in maintenance so
> the
> >> >>> Infra team are retiring it.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> My personal opinion(having done some of this in my day job, and
> >> discussed
> >> >>> similar on some other ASF projects) is we migrate the website to
> >> gitsubpub
> >> >>> and Jekyll.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> This will give us the ability to easily stand up the existing
> website
> >> on
> >> >>> our own laptops, or development servers make changes and deploy
> them.
> >> Also
> >> >>> without the templating system that Apache CMS enforces upon you,
> its a
> >> >>> far
> >> >>> quicker development cycle.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Of course we could just use standard HTML & Javascript, but part of
> the
> >> >>> reason I'd like to use Jekyll is the fact users can create content
> >> using
> >> >>> Markdown syntax instead of HTML and Javascript. Jekyll is a static
> >> >>> blogging
> >> >>> platform, so its designed for frequent updating, and as people may
> have
> >> >>> noticed I've been blogging OODT stuff on my personal blog because
> the
> >> CMS
> >> >>> is a pain to update.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Has anyone got an opinion? It feels like we did stage one which was
> >> make
> >> >>> the website easier to update, but stage two is to make the process a
> >> lot
> >> >>> easier, and standardised.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Cheers
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Tom
> >> >>>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
>
Re: OODT Website Changes (Redux)
Posted by "Mattmann, Chris A (3980)" <ch...@jpl.nasa.gov>.
Understood, OK Tom.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
Chief Architect
Instrument Software and Science Data Systems Section (398)
NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
Office: 168-519, Mailstop: 168-527
Email: chris.a.mattmann@nasa.gov
WWW: http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Director, Information Retrieval and Data Science Group (IRDS)
Adjunct Associate Professor, Computer Science Department
University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
WWW: http://irds.usc.edu/
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
On 4/5/16, 12:10 PM, "Tom Barber" <to...@meteorite.bi> wrote:
>Yeah, I'm not suggesting we switch any time soon.
>
>My viewpoint is thus: we can do a better job with content, look and feel
>and the maintenance side.
>
>Personally, I find the CMS hard to use, maybe its just me, who knows. So,
>my suggestion is purely do some POC work to come up with what may, or may
>not be a better solution. If the workflow and tech is acceptable, then
>build out the site in the new tech, it can be demoed on GH pages or
>wherever in the interim, and finally, when we're happy with the content,
>the theme and the ability to update it, then... and only then do we change
>it.
>
>From my own opinion, I want to put some more free time into improving the
>site, but I feel that it would be a much quicker and more efficient process
>if the stuff wasn't inside CMS, that is all.
>
>Tom
>
>On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 2:27 PM, Chris Mattmann <ch...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>> Tom, my comment here is that we tried to do the exact
>> same thing in Summer 2014 on XDATA. Just note that
>> “dummy site” is now what we have in our operational
>> site for Apache OODT. I think we have just only recently
>> come to a point where it’s more stable (we don’t have
>> people like Sebb coming externally saying our links don’t
>> work).
>>
>> Now you are proposing to change the site again, which
>> design wise is fine by me (though shows how much I know
>> since I liked SK’s old site even - and the new site started
>> by the next generation also looks nice too). However,
>> stability wise it’s not fine by me unless *the entire site*
>> is migrated, and until we run a link checker against it
>> long before turning on the switch to move over to it.
>>
>> No one is clamoring for a website redesign - it’s mostly
>> been discussion led by you and commented on by Val, and
>> Lewis.
>>
>> My 2c.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Chris
>>
>> —
>> Chris Mattmann
>> chris.mattmann@gmail.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 4/5/16, 8:55 AM, "Tom Barber" <to...@meteorite.bi> wrote:
>>
>> >Okay here's what I propose. Apache CMS will be retired, not any time
>> soon, but at some point in the medium term future. ASF Infra offer
>> gitsubpub/svnsubpub as the standard for website publishing and we(I?) want
>> something more useable for non webdevs. Thats not necessarily code free,
>> but certainly an easy process for people to upload new content.
>> >My suggestion is that I knock up a dummy replacement site in Jekyll, that
>> migrates across a couple of the pages and some dummy blog content, and I'll
>> come back and demonstrate the user publishing flow, at which point we can
>> have a discussion as to whether its something we pursue, or not.
>> >
>> >
>> >Sound like a plan?
>> >
>> >Of course in the mean time, if anyone else has any suggestions for a
>> "dynamic" static website, speak up!
>> >
>> >Tom
>> >
>> >
>> >On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 10:09 AM, Tom Barber <to...@meteorite.bi>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >Indeed Val
>> >Ease of use is something I'm trying to achieve because it makes it easier
>> for everyone to help maintain our resources with minimum effort.
>> >
>> >In Jekyll (if that was a chosen solution Markdown is entirely optional,
>> you can just as easily publish HTML content as markdown, I just mentioned
>> it as an easy barrier to get people to write blog posts, but there are a
>> bunch of HTML generating apps on the market, of you could use the WP
>> editor, and hit the source button and copy the content from WP to Jekyll,
>> not great always the most obvious workflow, but would do the job.
>> >
>> >Also, not tried it, but Prose.io gives you a MD WYSIWYG editor for
>> github, so assuming we were running the fork -> pull request model, you
>> could edit the OODT site using Prose on Github and just push over a pull
>> request with the changes made.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >Prose seems to support basic formatting and inserting of images, once a
>> website template is designed I would expect contributers to do any more
>> anyway, unless they wanted to, content should be about writing a blog post
>> of page and hitting the go button.
>> >
>> >
>> >A quick google also reveals some Word to Markdown tools, I've not used
>> them either, but I guess they would do a job.
>> >
>> >Tom
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 1:30 AM, Mallder, Valerie <
>> Valerie.Mallder@jhuapl.edu> wrote:
>> >
>> >You are absolutely right, in markdown you would be missing images. My
>> objection to using markdown is having to learn a new language syntax for
>> styling the text. I have no objection to having a static site. I just want
>> it to be easy to use and not require that you have to spend time learning
>> something new. If it takes too much time to do (because you have to learn
>> some new stuff in order to do it) you may find that people will put it on
>> their todo list but never end up getting to it because they are too busy
>> working on higher priority tasks in their day jobs. I think your primary
>> goal (when choosing what you want to do) should be to add as little work as
>> possible to people's plates. That's all. If there are any WYSIWYG editors
>> out there that have the option to do a "save as" to markdown format that
>> would be optimal. But I don't know if there are any.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >Sent with Good (www.good.com <http://www.good.com>)
>> >________________________________
>> >From: Tom Barber <to...@meteorite.bi>
>> >Sent: Saturday, April 2, 2016 7:17:42 PM
>> >To: dev@oodt.apache.org
>> >Subject: Re: OODT Website Changes (Redux)
>> >
>> >Also, (playing devils advocate) if it's a word doc why can't you just copy
>> >and paste it into a markdown file? The only major thing you'd be missing
>> >is any images :)
>> >
>> >Another plus to a static blogging site is, if you decide it sucks in a few
>> >years time, you just have some html to move somewhere else, it's just a
>> >static website, if you decide WordPress sucked or infra said they'd host
>> >it, then down the line changed their mind, you'd have a much bigger task
>> >on your hands.
>> >
>> >Tom
>> >On 3 Apr 2016 00:07, "Tom Barber" <to...@meteorite.bi> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hey Val,
>> >>
>> >> You can write HTML and a bunch of other stuff, but I'm trying to offer
>> up
>> >> a solution that is easy for people to deploy and develop on outside of
>> the
>> >> Apache infrastructure, and markdown, being just text is easy to deploy.
>> >> Also Wordpress etc require databases and backing infra where as Jekyll
>> is
>> >> purely static HTML by the time it is deployed.
>> >>
>> >> I have no idea if Infra would support wordpress anyway, I doubt it, when
>> >> they said they were retiring Apache CMS, it wasn't like "oh but don't
>> worry
>> >> folks, you can stand up a wordpress website", I could be wrong, but that
>> >> was my impression.
>> >>
>> >> At the end of a day, creating a blog post that looks like:
>> >>
>> >>
>> https://raw.githubusercontent.com/maciakl/Sample-Jekyll-Site/master/_posts/2012-02-10-code-snippets.markdown
>> >>
>> >> is much quicker than writing a bunch of HTML, but the Apache CMS is
>> also a
>> >> bit of a lie, because if you think you don't have to write HTML because
>> its
>> >> a CMS, you're sorely mistaken! ;)
>> >>
>> >> Tom
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 12:00 AM, Mallder, Valerie <
>> >> Valerie.Mallder@jhuapl.edu> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> I am not familiar with Jekyll, but I disagree with using markdown. Why
>> >>> must we write in any kind of markup language? That would suck. Why not
>> just
>> >>> use a better CMS? There are plenty out there. I personally develop
>> websites
>> >>> in Wordpress. It's free and very easy to use. You can edit posts in a
>> >>> WYSIWYG editor. You can also copy-paste from a Word doc into the post.
>> Just
>> >>> my opinion.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >
>> >
>> >>> Sent with Good (www.good.com <http://www.good.com><http://www.good.com
>> >)
>> >>> ________________________________
>> >>> From: Tom Barber <to...@meteorite.bi>
>> >>> Sent: Saturday, April 2, 2016 6:45:21 PM
>> >>> To: dev@oodt.apache.org
>> >>> Subject: OODT Website Changes (Redux)
>> >>>
>> >>> Alright folks,
>> >>>
>> >>> Most peope who have been on the list for a while know we moved from the
>> >>> most static of static websites to Apache CMS a while ago to allow for
>> more
>> >>> regular updating and maintenance of the website.
>> >>>
>> >>> Lewis then put a bunch of work into creating a template for the CMS
>> >>> website
>> >>> and we revamped a lot of the content, but the CMS has a bunch of issues
>> >>> both in the ease of developing a website and also in maintenance so the
>> >>> Infra team are retiring it.
>> >>>
>> >>> My personal opinion(having done some of this in my day job, and
>> discussed
>> >>> similar on some other ASF projects) is we migrate the website to
>> gitsubpub
>> >>> and Jekyll.
>> >>>
>> >>> This will give us the ability to easily stand up the existing website
>> on
>> >>> our own laptops, or development servers make changes and deploy them.
>> Also
>> >>> without the templating system that Apache CMS enforces upon you, its a
>> >>> far
>> >>> quicker development cycle.
>> >>>
>> >>> Of course we could just use standard HTML & Javascript, but part of the
>> >>> reason I'd like to use Jekyll is the fact users can create content
>> using
>> >>> Markdown syntax instead of HTML and Javascript. Jekyll is a static
>> >>> blogging
>> >>> platform, so its designed for frequent updating, and as people may have
>> >>> noticed I've been blogging OODT stuff on my personal blog because the
>> CMS
>> >>> is a pain to update.
>> >>>
>> >>> Has anyone got an opinion? It feels like we did stage one which was
>> make
>> >>> the website easier to update, but stage two is to make the process a
>> lot
>> >>> easier, and standardised.
>> >>>
>> >>> Cheers
>> >>>
>> >>> Tom
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
Re: OODT Website Changes (Redux)
Posted by Tom Barber <to...@meteorite.bi>.
Yeah, I'm not suggesting we switch any time soon.
My viewpoint is thus: we can do a better job with content, look and feel
and the maintenance side.
Personally, I find the CMS hard to use, maybe its just me, who knows. So,
my suggestion is purely do some POC work to come up with what may, or may
not be a better solution. If the workflow and tech is acceptable, then
build out the site in the new tech, it can be demoed on GH pages or
wherever in the interim, and finally, when we're happy with the content,
the theme and the ability to update it, then... and only then do we change
it.
>From my own opinion, I want to put some more free time into improving the
site, but I feel that it would be a much quicker and more efficient process
if the stuff wasn't inside CMS, that is all.
Tom
On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 2:27 PM, Chris Mattmann <ch...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Tom, my comment here is that we tried to do the exact
> same thing in Summer 2014 on XDATA. Just note that
> “dummy site” is now what we have in our operational
> site for Apache OODT. I think we have just only recently
> come to a point where it’s more stable (we don’t have
> people like Sebb coming externally saying our links don’t
> work).
>
> Now you are proposing to change the site again, which
> design wise is fine by me (though shows how much I know
> since I liked SK’s old site even - and the new site started
> by the next generation also looks nice too). However,
> stability wise it’s not fine by me unless *the entire site*
> is migrated, and until we run a link checker against it
> long before turning on the switch to move over to it.
>
> No one is clamoring for a website redesign - it’s mostly
> been discussion led by you and commented on by Val, and
> Lewis.
>
> My 2c.
>
> Cheers,
> Chris
>
> —
> Chris Mattmann
> chris.mattmann@gmail.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 4/5/16, 8:55 AM, "Tom Barber" <to...@meteorite.bi> wrote:
>
> >Okay here's what I propose. Apache CMS will be retired, not any time
> soon, but at some point in the medium term future. ASF Infra offer
> gitsubpub/svnsubpub as the standard for website publishing and we(I?) want
> something more useable for non webdevs. Thats not necessarily code free,
> but certainly an easy process for people to upload new content.
> >My suggestion is that I knock up a dummy replacement site in Jekyll, that
> migrates across a couple of the pages and some dummy blog content, and I'll
> come back and demonstrate the user publishing flow, at which point we can
> have a discussion as to whether its something we pursue, or not.
> >
> >
> >Sound like a plan?
> >
> >Of course in the mean time, if anyone else has any suggestions for a
> "dynamic" static website, speak up!
> >
> >Tom
> >
> >
> >On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 10:09 AM, Tom Barber <to...@meteorite.bi>
> wrote:
> >
> >Indeed Val
> >Ease of use is something I'm trying to achieve because it makes it easier
> for everyone to help maintain our resources with minimum effort.
> >
> >In Jekyll (if that was a chosen solution Markdown is entirely optional,
> you can just as easily publish HTML content as markdown, I just mentioned
> it as an easy barrier to get people to write blog posts, but there are a
> bunch of HTML generating apps on the market, of you could use the WP
> editor, and hit the source button and copy the content from WP to Jekyll,
> not great always the most obvious workflow, but would do the job.
> >
> >Also, not tried it, but Prose.io gives you a MD WYSIWYG editor for
> github, so assuming we were running the fork -> pull request model, you
> could edit the OODT site using Prose on Github and just push over a pull
> request with the changes made.
> >
> >
> >
> >Prose seems to support basic formatting and inserting of images, once a
> website template is designed I would expect contributers to do any more
> anyway, unless they wanted to, content should be about writing a blog post
> of page and hitting the go button.
> >
> >
> >A quick google also reveals some Word to Markdown tools, I've not used
> them either, but I guess they would do a job.
> >
> >Tom
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 1:30 AM, Mallder, Valerie <
> Valerie.Mallder@jhuapl.edu> wrote:
> >
> >You are absolutely right, in markdown you would be missing images. My
> objection to using markdown is having to learn a new language syntax for
> styling the text. I have no objection to having a static site. I just want
> it to be easy to use and not require that you have to spend time learning
> something new. If it takes too much time to do (because you have to learn
> some new stuff in order to do it) you may find that people will put it on
> their todo list but never end up getting to it because they are too busy
> working on higher priority tasks in their day jobs. I think your primary
> goal (when choosing what you want to do) should be to add as little work as
> possible to people's plates. That's all. If there are any WYSIWYG editors
> out there that have the option to do a "save as" to markdown format that
> would be optimal. But I don't know if there are any.
> >
> >
> >
> >Sent with Good (www.good.com <http://www.good.com>)
> >________________________________
> >From: Tom Barber <to...@meteorite.bi>
> >Sent: Saturday, April 2, 2016 7:17:42 PM
> >To: dev@oodt.apache.org
> >Subject: Re: OODT Website Changes (Redux)
> >
> >Also, (playing devils advocate) if it's a word doc why can't you just copy
> >and paste it into a markdown file? The only major thing you'd be missing
> >is any images :)
> >
> >Another plus to a static blogging site is, if you decide it sucks in a few
> >years time, you just have some html to move somewhere else, it's just a
> >static website, if you decide WordPress sucked or infra said they'd host
> >it, then down the line changed their mind, you'd have a much bigger task
> >on your hands.
> >
> >Tom
> >On 3 Apr 2016 00:07, "Tom Barber" <to...@meteorite.bi> wrote:
> >
> >> Hey Val,
> >>
> >> You can write HTML and a bunch of other stuff, but I'm trying to offer
> up
> >> a solution that is easy for people to deploy and develop on outside of
> the
> >> Apache infrastructure, and markdown, being just text is easy to deploy.
> >> Also Wordpress etc require databases and backing infra where as Jekyll
> is
> >> purely static HTML by the time it is deployed.
> >>
> >> I have no idea if Infra would support wordpress anyway, I doubt it, when
> >> they said they were retiring Apache CMS, it wasn't like "oh but don't
> worry
> >> folks, you can stand up a wordpress website", I could be wrong, but that
> >> was my impression.
> >>
> >> At the end of a day, creating a blog post that looks like:
> >>
> >>
> https://raw.githubusercontent.com/maciakl/Sample-Jekyll-Site/master/_posts/2012-02-10-code-snippets.markdown
> >>
> >> is much quicker than writing a bunch of HTML, but the Apache CMS is
> also a
> >> bit of a lie, because if you think you don't have to write HTML because
> its
> >> a CMS, you're sorely mistaken! ;)
> >>
> >> Tom
> >>
> >>
> >> On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 12:00 AM, Mallder, Valerie <
> >> Valerie.Mallder@jhuapl.edu> wrote:
> >>
> >>> I am not familiar with Jekyll, but I disagree with using markdown. Why
> >>> must we write in any kind of markup language? That would suck. Why not
> just
> >>> use a better CMS? There are plenty out there. I personally develop
> websites
> >>> in Wordpress. It's free and very easy to use. You can edit posts in a
> >>> WYSIWYG editor. You can also copy-paste from a Word doc into the post.
> Just
> >>> my opinion.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >
> >
> >>> Sent with Good (www.good.com <http://www.good.com><http://www.good.com
> >)
> >>> ________________________________
> >>> From: Tom Barber <to...@meteorite.bi>
> >>> Sent: Saturday, April 2, 2016 6:45:21 PM
> >>> To: dev@oodt.apache.org
> >>> Subject: OODT Website Changes (Redux)
> >>>
> >>> Alright folks,
> >>>
> >>> Most peope who have been on the list for a while know we moved from the
> >>> most static of static websites to Apache CMS a while ago to allow for
> more
> >>> regular updating and maintenance of the website.
> >>>
> >>> Lewis then put a bunch of work into creating a template for the CMS
> >>> website
> >>> and we revamped a lot of the content, but the CMS has a bunch of issues
> >>> both in the ease of developing a website and also in maintenance so the
> >>> Infra team are retiring it.
> >>>
> >>> My personal opinion(having done some of this in my day job, and
> discussed
> >>> similar on some other ASF projects) is we migrate the website to
> gitsubpub
> >>> and Jekyll.
> >>>
> >>> This will give us the ability to easily stand up the existing website
> on
> >>> our own laptops, or development servers make changes and deploy them.
> Also
> >>> without the templating system that Apache CMS enforces upon you, its a
> >>> far
> >>> quicker development cycle.
> >>>
> >>> Of course we could just use standard HTML & Javascript, but part of the
> >>> reason I'd like to use Jekyll is the fact users can create content
> using
> >>> Markdown syntax instead of HTML and Javascript. Jekyll is a static
> >>> blogging
> >>> platform, so its designed for frequent updating, and as people may have
> >>> noticed I've been blogging OODT stuff on my personal blog because the
> CMS
> >>> is a pain to update.
> >>>
> >>> Has anyone got an opinion? It feels like we did stage one which was
> make
> >>> the website easier to update, but stage two is to make the process a
> lot
> >>> easier, and standardised.
> >>>
> >>> Cheers
> >>>
> >>> Tom
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
Re: OODT Website Changes (Redux)
Posted by Chris Mattmann <ch...@gmail.com>.
Tom, my comment here is that we tried to do the exact
same thing in Summer 2014 on XDATA. Just note that
“dummy site” is now what we have in our operational
site for Apache OODT. I think we have just only recently
come to a point where it’s more stable (we don’t have
people like Sebb coming externally saying our links don’t
work).
Now you are proposing to change the site again, which
design wise is fine by me (though shows how much I know
since I liked SK’s old site even - and the new site started
by the next generation also looks nice too). However,
stability wise it’s not fine by me unless *the entire site*
is migrated, and until we run a link checker against it
long before turning on the switch to move over to it.
No one is clamoring for a website redesign - it’s mostly
been discussion led by you and commented on by Val, and
Lewis.
My 2c.
Cheers,
Chris
—
Chris Mattmann
chris.mattmann@gmail.com
On 4/5/16, 8:55 AM, "Tom Barber" <to...@meteorite.bi> wrote:
>Okay here's what I propose. Apache CMS will be retired, not any time soon, but at some point in the medium term future. ASF Infra offer gitsubpub/svnsubpub as the standard for website publishing and we(I?) want something more useable for non webdevs. Thats not necessarily code free, but certainly an easy process for people to upload new content.
>My suggestion is that I knock up a dummy replacement site in Jekyll, that migrates across a couple of the pages and some dummy blog content, and I'll come back and demonstrate the user publishing flow, at which point we can have a discussion as to whether its something we pursue, or not.
>
>
>Sound like a plan?
>
>Of course in the mean time, if anyone else has any suggestions for a "dynamic" static website, speak up!
>
>Tom
>
>
>On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 10:09 AM, Tom Barber <to...@meteorite.bi> wrote:
>
>Indeed Val
>Ease of use is something I'm trying to achieve because it makes it easier for everyone to help maintain our resources with minimum effort.
>
>In Jekyll (if that was a chosen solution Markdown is entirely optional, you can just as easily publish HTML content as markdown, I just mentioned it as an easy barrier to get people to write blog posts, but there are a bunch of HTML generating apps on the market, of you could use the WP editor, and hit the source button and copy the content from WP to Jekyll, not great always the most obvious workflow, but would do the job.
>
>Also, not tried it, but Prose.io gives you a MD WYSIWYG editor for github, so assuming we were running the fork -> pull request model, you could edit the OODT site using Prose on Github and just push over a pull request with the changes made.
>
>
>
>Prose seems to support basic formatting and inserting of images, once a website template is designed I would expect contributers to do any more anyway, unless they wanted to, content should be about writing a blog post of page and hitting the go button.
>
>
>A quick google also reveals some Word to Markdown tools, I've not used them either, but I guess they would do a job.
>
>Tom
>
>
>
>
>On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 1:30 AM, Mallder, Valerie <Va...@jhuapl.edu> wrote:
>
>You are absolutely right, in markdown you would be missing images. My objection to using markdown is having to learn a new language syntax for styling the text. I have no objection to having a static site. I just want it to be easy to use and not require that you have to spend time learning something new. If it takes too much time to do (because you have to learn some new stuff in order to do it) you may find that people will put it on their todo list but never end up getting to it because they are too busy working on higher priority tasks in their day jobs. I think your primary goal (when choosing what you want to do) should be to add as little work as possible to people's plates. That's all. If there are any WYSIWYG editors out there that have the option to do a "save as" to markdown format that would be optimal. But I don't know if there are any.
>
>
>
>Sent with Good (www.good.com <http://www.good.com>)
>________________________________
>From: Tom Barber <to...@meteorite.bi>
>Sent: Saturday, April 2, 2016 7:17:42 PM
>To: dev@oodt.apache.org
>Subject: Re: OODT Website Changes (Redux)
>
>Also, (playing devils advocate) if it's a word doc why can't you just copy
>and paste it into a markdown file? The only major thing you'd be missing
>is any images :)
>
>Another plus to a static blogging site is, if you decide it sucks in a few
>years time, you just have some html to move somewhere else, it's just a
>static website, if you decide WordPress sucked or infra said they'd host
>it, then down the line changed their mind, you'd have a much bigger task
>on your hands.
>
>Tom
>On 3 Apr 2016 00:07, "Tom Barber" <to...@meteorite.bi> wrote:
>
>> Hey Val,
>>
>> You can write HTML and a bunch of other stuff, but I'm trying to offer up
>> a solution that is easy for people to deploy and develop on outside of the
>> Apache infrastructure, and markdown, being just text is easy to deploy.
>> Also Wordpress etc require databases and backing infra where as Jekyll is
>> purely static HTML by the time it is deployed.
>>
>> I have no idea if Infra would support wordpress anyway, I doubt it, when
>> they said they were retiring Apache CMS, it wasn't like "oh but don't worry
>> folks, you can stand up a wordpress website", I could be wrong, but that
>> was my impression.
>>
>> At the end of a day, creating a blog post that looks like:
>>
>> https://raw.githubusercontent.com/maciakl/Sample-Jekyll-Site/master/_posts/2012-02-10-code-snippets.markdown
>>
>> is much quicker than writing a bunch of HTML, but the Apache CMS is also a
>> bit of a lie, because if you think you don't have to write HTML because its
>> a CMS, you're sorely mistaken! ;)
>>
>> Tom
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 12:00 AM, Mallder, Valerie <
>> Valerie.Mallder@jhuapl.edu> wrote:
>>
>>> I am not familiar with Jekyll, but I disagree with using markdown. Why
>>> must we write in any kind of markup language? That would suck. Why not just
>>> use a better CMS? There are plenty out there. I personally develop websites
>>> in Wordpress. It's free and very easy to use. You can edit posts in a
>>> WYSIWYG editor. You can also copy-paste from a Word doc into the post. Just
>>> my opinion.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
>>> Sent with Good (www.good.com <http://www.good.com><http://www.good.com>)
>>> ________________________________
>>> From: Tom Barber <to...@meteorite.bi>
>>> Sent: Saturday, April 2, 2016 6:45:21 PM
>>> To: dev@oodt.apache.org
>>> Subject: OODT Website Changes (Redux)
>>>
>>> Alright folks,
>>>
>>> Most peope who have been on the list for a while know we moved from the
>>> most static of static websites to Apache CMS a while ago to allow for more
>>> regular updating and maintenance of the website.
>>>
>>> Lewis then put a bunch of work into creating a template for the CMS
>>> website
>>> and we revamped a lot of the content, but the CMS has a bunch of issues
>>> both in the ease of developing a website and also in maintenance so the
>>> Infra team are retiring it.
>>>
>>> My personal opinion(having done some of this in my day job, and discussed
>>> similar on some other ASF projects) is we migrate the website to gitsubpub
>>> and Jekyll.
>>>
>>> This will give us the ability to easily stand up the existing website on
>>> our own laptops, or development servers make changes and deploy them. Also
>>> without the templating system that Apache CMS enforces upon you, its a
>>> far
>>> quicker development cycle.
>>>
>>> Of course we could just use standard HTML & Javascript, but part of the
>>> reason I'd like to use Jekyll is the fact users can create content using
>>> Markdown syntax instead of HTML and Javascript. Jekyll is a static
>>> blogging
>>> platform, so its designed for frequent updating, and as people may have
>>> noticed I've been blogging OODT stuff on my personal blog because the CMS
>>> is a pain to update.
>>>
>>> Has anyone got an opinion? It feels like we did stage one which was make
>>> the website easier to update, but stage two is to make the process a lot
>>> easier, and standardised.
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>>
>>> Tom
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Re: OODT Website Changes (Redux)
Posted by Lewis John Mcgibbney <le...@gmail.com>.
Steam ahead captain
On Tuesday, April 5, 2016, Tom Barber <to...@meteorite.bi> wrote:
> Okay here's what I propose. Apache CMS will be retired, not any time soon,
> but at some point in the medium term future. ASF Infra offer
> gitsubpub/svnsubpub as the standard for website publishing and we(I?) want
> something more useable for non webdevs. Thats not necessarily code free,
> but certainly an easy process for people to upload new content.
>
> My suggestion is that I knock up a dummy replacement site in Jekyll, that
> migrates across a couple of the pages and some dummy blog content, and I'll
> come back and demonstrate the user publishing flow, at which point we can
> have a discussion as to whether its something we pursue, or not.
>
> Sound like a plan?
>
> Of course in the mean time, if anyone else has any suggestions for a
> "dynamic" static website, speak up!
>
> Tom
>
> On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 10:09 AM, Tom Barber <tom.barber@meteorite.bi
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','tom.barber@meteorite.bi');>> wrote:
>
>> Indeed Val
>>
>> Ease of use is something I'm trying to achieve because it makes it easier
>> for everyone to help maintain our resources with minimum effort.
>>
>> In Jekyll (if that was a chosen solution Markdown is entirely optional,
>> you can just as easily publish HTML content as markdown, I just mentioned
>> it as an easy barrier to get people to write blog posts, but there are a
>> bunch of HTML generating apps on the market, of you could use the WP
>> editor, and hit the source button and copy the content from WP to Jekyll,
>> not great always the most obvious workflow, but would do the job.
>>
>> Also, not tried it, but Prose.io gives you a MD WYSIWYG editor for
>> github, so assuming we were running the fork -> pull request model, you
>> could edit the OODT site using Prose on Github and just push over a pull
>> request with the changes made.
>>
>>
>> Prose seems to support basic formatting and inserting of images, once a
>> website template is designed I would expect contributers to do any more
>> anyway, unless they wanted to, content should be about writing a blog post
>> of page and hitting the go button.
>>
>>
>> A quick google also reveals some Word to Markdown tools, I've not used
>> them either, but I guess they would do a job.
>>
>> Tom
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 1:30 AM, Mallder, Valerie <
>> Valerie.Mallder@jhuapl.edu
>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','Valerie.Mallder@jhuapl.edu');>> wrote:
>>
>>> You are absolutely right, in markdown you would be missing images. My
>>> objection to using markdown is having to learn a new language syntax for
>>> styling the text. I have no objection to having a static site. I just want
>>> it to be easy to use and not require that you have to spend time learning
>>> something new. If it takes too much time to do (because you have to learn
>>> some new stuff in order to do it) you may find that people will put it on
>>> their todo list but never end up getting to it because they are too busy
>>> working on higher priority tasks in their day jobs. I think your primary
>>> goal (when choosing what you want to do) should be to add as little work as
>>> possible to people's plates. That's all. If there are any WYSIWYG editors
>>> out there that have the option to do a "save as" to markdown format that
>>> would be optimal. But I don't know if there are any.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Sent with Good (www.good.com)
>>> ________________________________
>>> From: Tom Barber <tom.barber@meteorite.bi
>>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','tom.barber@meteorite.bi');>>
>>> Sent: Saturday, April 2, 2016 7:17:42 PM
>>> To: dev@oodt.apache.org
>>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','dev@oodt.apache.org');>
>>> Subject: Re: OODT Website Changes (Redux)
>>>
>>> Also, (playing devils advocate) if it's a word doc why can't you just
>>> copy
>>> and paste it into a markdown file? The only major thing you'd be missing
>>> is any images :)
>>>
>>> Another plus to a static blogging site is, if you decide it sucks in a
>>> few
>>> years time, you just have some html to move somewhere else, it's just a
>>> static website, if you decide WordPress sucked or infra said they'd host
>>> it, then down the line changed their mind, you'd have a much bigger task
>>> on your hands.
>>>
>>> Tom
>>> On 3 Apr 2016 00:07, "Tom Barber" <tom.barber@meteorite.bi
>>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','tom.barber@meteorite.bi');>> wrote:
>>>
>>> > Hey Val,
>>> >
>>> > You can write HTML and a bunch of other stuff, but I'm trying to offer
>>> up
>>> > a solution that is easy for people to deploy and develop on outside of
>>> the
>>> > Apache infrastructure, and markdown, being just text is easy to deploy.
>>> > Also Wordpress etc require databases and backing infra where as Jekyll
>>> is
>>> > purely static HTML by the time it is deployed.
>>> >
>>> > I have no idea if Infra would support wordpress anyway, I doubt it,
>>> when
>>> > they said they were retiring Apache CMS, it wasn't like "oh but don't
>>> worry
>>> > folks, you can stand up a wordpress website", I could be wrong, but
>>> that
>>> > was my impression.
>>> >
>>> > At the end of a day, creating a blog post that looks like:
>>> >
>>> >
>>> https://raw.githubusercontent.com/maciakl/Sample-Jekyll-Site/master/_posts/2012-02-10-code-snippets.markdown
>>> >
>>> > is much quicker than writing a bunch of HTML, but the Apache CMS is
>>> also a
>>> > bit of a lie, because if you think you don't have to write HTML
>>> because its
>>> > a CMS, you're sorely mistaken! ;)
>>> >
>>> > Tom
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 12:00 AM, Mallder, Valerie <
>>> > Valerie.Mallder@jhuapl.edu
>>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','Valerie.Mallder@jhuapl.edu');>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> I am not familiar with Jekyll, but I disagree with using markdown. Why
>>> >> must we write in any kind of markup language? That would suck. Why
>>> not just
>>> >> use a better CMS? There are plenty out there. I personally develop
>>> websites
>>> >> in Wordpress. It's free and very easy to use. You can edit posts in a
>>> >> WYSIWYG editor. You can also copy-paste from a Word doc into the
>>> post. Just
>>> >> my opinion.
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> Sent with Good (www.good.com<http://www.good.com>)
>>> >> ________________________________
>>> >> From: Tom Barber <tom.barber@meteorite.bi
>>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','tom.barber@meteorite.bi');>>
>>> >> Sent: Saturday, April 2, 2016 6:45:21 PM
>>> >> To: dev@oodt.apache.org
>>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','dev@oodt.apache.org');>
>>> >> Subject: OODT Website Changes (Redux)
>>> >>
>>> >> Alright folks,
>>> >>
>>> >> Most peope who have been on the list for a while know we moved from
>>> the
>>> >> most static of static websites to Apache CMS a while ago to allow for
>>> more
>>> >> regular updating and maintenance of the website.
>>> >>
>>> >> Lewis then put a bunch of work into creating a template for the CMS
>>> >> website
>>> >> and we revamped a lot of the content, but the CMS has a bunch of
>>> issues
>>> >> both in the ease of developing a website and also in maintenance so
>>> the
>>> >> Infra team are retiring it.
>>> >>
>>> >> My personal opinion(having done some of this in my day job, and
>>> discussed
>>> >> similar on some other ASF projects) is we migrate the website to
>>> gitsubpub
>>> >> and Jekyll.
>>> >>
>>> >> This will give us the ability to easily stand up the existing website
>>> on
>>> >> our own laptops, or development servers make changes and deploy them.
>>> Also
>>> >> without the templating system that Apache CMS enforces upon you, its
>>> a
>>> >> far
>>> >> quicker development cycle.
>>> >>
>>> >> Of course we could just use standard HTML & Javascript, but part of
>>> the
>>> >> reason I'd like to use Jekyll is the fact users can create content
>>> using
>>> >> Markdown syntax instead of HTML and Javascript. Jekyll is a static
>>> >> blogging
>>> >> platform, so its designed for frequent updating, and as people may
>>> have
>>> >> noticed I've been blogging OODT stuff on my personal blog because the
>>> CMS
>>> >> is a pain to update.
>>> >>
>>> >> Has anyone got an opinion? It feels like we did stage one which was
>>> make
>>> >> the website easier to update, but stage two is to make the process a
>>> lot
>>> >> easier, and standardised.
>>> >>
>>> >> Cheers
>>> >>
>>> >> Tom
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>
>>
>
--
*Lewis*
Re: OODT Website Changes (Redux)
Posted by Tom Barber <to...@meteorite.bi>.
Okay here's what I propose. Apache CMS will be retired, not any time soon,
but at some point in the medium term future. ASF Infra offer
gitsubpub/svnsubpub as the standard for website publishing and we(I?) want
something more useable for non webdevs. Thats not necessarily code free,
but certainly an easy process for people to upload new content.
My suggestion is that I knock up a dummy replacement site in Jekyll, that
migrates across a couple of the pages and some dummy blog content, and I'll
come back and demonstrate the user publishing flow, at which point we can
have a discussion as to whether its something we pursue, or not.
Sound like a plan?
Of course in the mean time, if anyone else has any suggestions for a
"dynamic" static website, speak up!
Tom
On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 10:09 AM, Tom Barber <to...@meteorite.bi> wrote:
> Indeed Val
>
> Ease of use is something I'm trying to achieve because it makes it easier
> for everyone to help maintain our resources with minimum effort.
>
> In Jekyll (if that was a chosen solution Markdown is entirely optional,
> you can just as easily publish HTML content as markdown, I just mentioned
> it as an easy barrier to get people to write blog posts, but there are a
> bunch of HTML generating apps on the market, of you could use the WP
> editor, and hit the source button and copy the content from WP to Jekyll,
> not great always the most obvious workflow, but would do the job.
>
> Also, not tried it, but Prose.io gives you a MD WYSIWYG editor for github,
> so assuming we were running the fork -> pull request model, you could edit
> the OODT site using Prose on Github and just push over a pull request with
> the changes made.
>
>
> Prose seems to support basic formatting and inserting of images, once a
> website template is designed I would expect contributers to do any more
> anyway, unless they wanted to, content should be about writing a blog post
> of page and hitting the go button.
>
>
> A quick google also reveals some Word to Markdown tools, I've not used
> them either, but I guess they would do a job.
>
> Tom
>
>
> On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 1:30 AM, Mallder, Valerie <
> Valerie.Mallder@jhuapl.edu> wrote:
>
>> You are absolutely right, in markdown you would be missing images. My
>> objection to using markdown is having to learn a new language syntax for
>> styling the text. I have no objection to having a static site. I just want
>> it to be easy to use and not require that you have to spend time learning
>> something new. If it takes too much time to do (because you have to learn
>> some new stuff in order to do it) you may find that people will put it on
>> their todo list but never end up getting to it because they are too busy
>> working on higher priority tasks in their day jobs. I think your primary
>> goal (when choosing what you want to do) should be to add as little work as
>> possible to people's plates. That's all. If there are any WYSIWYG editors
>> out there that have the option to do a "save as" to markdown format that
>> would be optimal. But I don't know if there are any.
>>
>>
>>
>> Sent with Good (www.good.com)
>> ________________________________
>> From: Tom Barber <to...@meteorite.bi>
>> Sent: Saturday, April 2, 2016 7:17:42 PM
>> To: dev@oodt.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: OODT Website Changes (Redux)
>>
>> Also, (playing devils advocate) if it's a word doc why can't you just copy
>> and paste it into a markdown file? The only major thing you'd be missing
>> is any images :)
>>
>> Another plus to a static blogging site is, if you decide it sucks in a few
>> years time, you just have some html to move somewhere else, it's just a
>> static website, if you decide WordPress sucked or infra said they'd host
>> it, then down the line changed their mind, you'd have a much bigger task
>> on your hands.
>>
>> Tom
>> On 3 Apr 2016 00:07, "Tom Barber" <to...@meteorite.bi> wrote:
>>
>> > Hey Val,
>> >
>> > You can write HTML and a bunch of other stuff, but I'm trying to offer
>> up
>> > a solution that is easy for people to deploy and develop on outside of
>> the
>> > Apache infrastructure, and markdown, being just text is easy to deploy.
>> > Also Wordpress etc require databases and backing infra where as Jekyll
>> is
>> > purely static HTML by the time it is deployed.
>> >
>> > I have no idea if Infra would support wordpress anyway, I doubt it, when
>> > they said they were retiring Apache CMS, it wasn't like "oh but don't
>> worry
>> > folks, you can stand up a wordpress website", I could be wrong, but that
>> > was my impression.
>> >
>> > At the end of a day, creating a blog post that looks like:
>> >
>> >
>> https://raw.githubusercontent.com/maciakl/Sample-Jekyll-Site/master/_posts/2012-02-10-code-snippets.markdown
>> >
>> > is much quicker than writing a bunch of HTML, but the Apache CMS is
>> also a
>> > bit of a lie, because if you think you don't have to write HTML because
>> its
>> > a CMS, you're sorely mistaken! ;)
>> >
>> > Tom
>> >
>> >
>> > On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 12:00 AM, Mallder, Valerie <
>> > Valerie.Mallder@jhuapl.edu> wrote:
>> >
>> >> I am not familiar with Jekyll, but I disagree with using markdown. Why
>> >> must we write in any kind of markup language? That would suck. Why not
>> just
>> >> use a better CMS? There are plenty out there. I personally develop
>> websites
>> >> in Wordpress. It's free and very easy to use. You can edit posts in a
>> >> WYSIWYG editor. You can also copy-paste from a Word doc into the post.
>> Just
>> >> my opinion.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Sent with Good (www.good.com<http://www.good.com>)
>> >> ________________________________
>> >> From: Tom Barber <to...@meteorite.bi>
>> >> Sent: Saturday, April 2, 2016 6:45:21 PM
>> >> To: dev@oodt.apache.org
>> >> Subject: OODT Website Changes (Redux)
>> >>
>> >> Alright folks,
>> >>
>> >> Most peope who have been on the list for a while know we moved from the
>> >> most static of static websites to Apache CMS a while ago to allow for
>> more
>> >> regular updating and maintenance of the website.
>> >>
>> >> Lewis then put a bunch of work into creating a template for the CMS
>> >> website
>> >> and we revamped a lot of the content, but the CMS has a bunch of issues
>> >> both in the ease of developing a website and also in maintenance so the
>> >> Infra team are retiring it.
>> >>
>> >> My personal opinion(having done some of this in my day job, and
>> discussed
>> >> similar on some other ASF projects) is we migrate the website to
>> gitsubpub
>> >> and Jekyll.
>> >>
>> >> This will give us the ability to easily stand up the existing website
>> on
>> >> our own laptops, or development servers make changes and deploy them.
>> Also
>> >> without the templating system that Apache CMS enforces upon you, its a
>> >> far
>> >> quicker development cycle.
>> >>
>> >> Of course we could just use standard HTML & Javascript, but part of the
>> >> reason I'd like to use Jekyll is the fact users can create content
>> using
>> >> Markdown syntax instead of HTML and Javascript. Jekyll is a static
>> >> blogging
>> >> platform, so its designed for frequent updating, and as people may have
>> >> noticed I've been blogging OODT stuff on my personal blog because the
>> CMS
>> >> is a pain to update.
>> >>
>> >> Has anyone got an opinion? It feels like we did stage one which was
>> make
>> >> the website easier to update, but stage two is to make the process a
>> lot
>> >> easier, and standardised.
>> >>
>> >> Cheers
>> >>
>> >> Tom
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>
Re: OODT Website Changes (Redux)
Posted by Tom Barber <to...@meteorite.bi>.
Indeed Val
Ease of use is something I'm trying to achieve because it makes it easier
for everyone to help maintain our resources with minimum effort.
In Jekyll (if that was a chosen solution Markdown is entirely optional, you
can just as easily publish HTML content as markdown, I just mentioned it as
an easy barrier to get people to write blog posts, but there are a bunch of
HTML generating apps on the market, of you could use the WP editor, and hit
the source button and copy the content from WP to Jekyll, not great always
the most obvious workflow, but would do the job.
Also, not tried it, but Prose.io gives you a MD WYSIWYG editor for github,
so assuming we were running the fork -> pull request model, you could edit
the OODT site using Prose on Github and just push over a pull request with
the changes made.
Prose seems to support basic formatting and inserting of images, once a
website template is designed I would expect contributers to do any more
anyway, unless they wanted to, content should be about writing a blog post
of page and hitting the go button.
A quick google also reveals some Word to Markdown tools, I've not used them
either, but I guess they would do a job.
Tom
On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 1:30 AM, Mallder, Valerie <Valerie.Mallder@jhuapl.edu
> wrote:
> You are absolutely right, in markdown you would be missing images. My
> objection to using markdown is having to learn a new language syntax for
> styling the text. I have no objection to having a static site. I just want
> it to be easy to use and not require that you have to spend time learning
> something new. If it takes too much time to do (because you have to learn
> some new stuff in order to do it) you may find that people will put it on
> their todo list but never end up getting to it because they are too busy
> working on higher priority tasks in their day jobs. I think your primary
> goal (when choosing what you want to do) should be to add as little work as
> possible to people's plates. That's all. If there are any WYSIWYG editors
> out there that have the option to do a "save as" to markdown format that
> would be optimal. But I don't know if there are any.
>
>
>
> Sent with Good (www.good.com)
> ________________________________
> From: Tom Barber <to...@meteorite.bi>
> Sent: Saturday, April 2, 2016 7:17:42 PM
> To: dev@oodt.apache.org
> Subject: Re: OODT Website Changes (Redux)
>
> Also, (playing devils advocate) if it's a word doc why can't you just copy
> and paste it into a markdown file? The only major thing you'd be missing
> is any images :)
>
> Another plus to a static blogging site is, if you decide it sucks in a few
> years time, you just have some html to move somewhere else, it's just a
> static website, if you decide WordPress sucked or infra said they'd host
> it, then down the line changed their mind, you'd have a much bigger task
> on your hands.
>
> Tom
> On 3 Apr 2016 00:07, "Tom Barber" <to...@meteorite.bi> wrote:
>
> > Hey Val,
> >
> > You can write HTML and a bunch of other stuff, but I'm trying to offer up
> > a solution that is easy for people to deploy and develop on outside of
> the
> > Apache infrastructure, and markdown, being just text is easy to deploy.
> > Also Wordpress etc require databases and backing infra where as Jekyll is
> > purely static HTML by the time it is deployed.
> >
> > I have no idea if Infra would support wordpress anyway, I doubt it, when
> > they said they were retiring Apache CMS, it wasn't like "oh but don't
> worry
> > folks, you can stand up a wordpress website", I could be wrong, but that
> > was my impression.
> >
> > At the end of a day, creating a blog post that looks like:
> >
> >
> https://raw.githubusercontent.com/maciakl/Sample-Jekyll-Site/master/_posts/2012-02-10-code-snippets.markdown
> >
> > is much quicker than writing a bunch of HTML, but the Apache CMS is also
> a
> > bit of a lie, because if you think you don't have to write HTML because
> its
> > a CMS, you're sorely mistaken! ;)
> >
> > Tom
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 12:00 AM, Mallder, Valerie <
> > Valerie.Mallder@jhuapl.edu> wrote:
> >
> >> I am not familiar with Jekyll, but I disagree with using markdown. Why
> >> must we write in any kind of markup language? That would suck. Why not
> just
> >> use a better CMS? There are plenty out there. I personally develop
> websites
> >> in Wordpress. It's free and very easy to use. You can edit posts in a
> >> WYSIWYG editor. You can also copy-paste from a Word doc into the post.
> Just
> >> my opinion.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Sent with Good (www.good.com<http://www.good.com>)
> >> ________________________________
> >> From: Tom Barber <to...@meteorite.bi>
> >> Sent: Saturday, April 2, 2016 6:45:21 PM
> >> To: dev@oodt.apache.org
> >> Subject: OODT Website Changes (Redux)
> >>
> >> Alright folks,
> >>
> >> Most peope who have been on the list for a while know we moved from the
> >> most static of static websites to Apache CMS a while ago to allow for
> more
> >> regular updating and maintenance of the website.
> >>
> >> Lewis then put a bunch of work into creating a template for the CMS
> >> website
> >> and we revamped a lot of the content, but the CMS has a bunch of issues
> >> both in the ease of developing a website and also in maintenance so the
> >> Infra team are retiring it.
> >>
> >> My personal opinion(having done some of this in my day job, and
> discussed
> >> similar on some other ASF projects) is we migrate the website to
> gitsubpub
> >> and Jekyll.
> >>
> >> This will give us the ability to easily stand up the existing website on
> >> our own laptops, or development servers make changes and deploy them.
> Also
> >> without the templating system that Apache CMS enforces upon you, its a
> >> far
> >> quicker development cycle.
> >>
> >> Of course we could just use standard HTML & Javascript, but part of the
> >> reason I'd like to use Jekyll is the fact users can create content using
> >> Markdown syntax instead of HTML and Javascript. Jekyll is a static
> >> blogging
> >> platform, so its designed for frequent updating, and as people may have
> >> noticed I've been blogging OODT stuff on my personal blog because the
> CMS
> >> is a pain to update.
> >>
> >> Has anyone got an opinion? It feels like we did stage one which was make
> >> the website easier to update, but stage two is to make the process a lot
> >> easier, and standardised.
> >>
> >> Cheers
> >>
> >> Tom
> >>
> >
> >
>
RE: OODT Website Changes (Redux)
Posted by "Mallder, Valerie" <Va...@jhuapl.edu>.
You are absolutely right, in markdown you would be missing images. My objection to using markdown is having to learn a new language syntax for styling the text. I have no objection to having a static site. I just want it to be easy to use and not require that you have to spend time learning something new. If it takes too much time to do (because you have to learn some new stuff in order to do it) you may find that people will put it on their todo list but never end up getting to it because they are too busy working on higher priority tasks in their day jobs. I think your primary goal (when choosing what you want to do) should be to add as little work as possible to people's plates. That's all. If there are any WYSIWYG editors out there that have the option to do a "save as" to markdown format that would be optimal. But I don't know if there are any.
Sent with Good (www.good.com)
________________________________
From: Tom Barber <to...@meteorite.bi>
Sent: Saturday, April 2, 2016 7:17:42 PM
To: dev@oodt.apache.org
Subject: Re: OODT Website Changes (Redux)
Also, (playing devils advocate) if it's a word doc why can't you just copy
and paste it into a markdown file? The only major thing you'd be missing
is any images :)
Another plus to a static blogging site is, if you decide it sucks in a few
years time, you just have some html to move somewhere else, it's just a
static website, if you decide WordPress sucked or infra said they'd host
it, then down the line changed their mind, you'd have a much bigger task
on your hands.
Tom
On 3 Apr 2016 00:07, "Tom Barber" <to...@meteorite.bi> wrote:
> Hey Val,
>
> You can write HTML and a bunch of other stuff, but I'm trying to offer up
> a solution that is easy for people to deploy and develop on outside of the
> Apache infrastructure, and markdown, being just text is easy to deploy.
> Also Wordpress etc require databases and backing infra where as Jekyll is
> purely static HTML by the time it is deployed.
>
> I have no idea if Infra would support wordpress anyway, I doubt it, when
> they said they were retiring Apache CMS, it wasn't like "oh but don't worry
> folks, you can stand up a wordpress website", I could be wrong, but that
> was my impression.
>
> At the end of a day, creating a blog post that looks like:
>
> https://raw.githubusercontent.com/maciakl/Sample-Jekyll-Site/master/_posts/2012-02-10-code-snippets.markdown
>
> is much quicker than writing a bunch of HTML, but the Apache CMS is also a
> bit of a lie, because if you think you don't have to write HTML because its
> a CMS, you're sorely mistaken! ;)
>
> Tom
>
>
> On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 12:00 AM, Mallder, Valerie <
> Valerie.Mallder@jhuapl.edu> wrote:
>
>> I am not familiar with Jekyll, but I disagree with using markdown. Why
>> must we write in any kind of markup language? That would suck. Why not just
>> use a better CMS? There are plenty out there. I personally develop websites
>> in Wordpress. It's free and very easy to use. You can edit posts in a
>> WYSIWYG editor. You can also copy-paste from a Word doc into the post. Just
>> my opinion.
>>
>>
>>
>> Sent with Good (www.good.com<http://www.good.com>)
>> ________________________________
>> From: Tom Barber <to...@meteorite.bi>
>> Sent: Saturday, April 2, 2016 6:45:21 PM
>> To: dev@oodt.apache.org
>> Subject: OODT Website Changes (Redux)
>>
>> Alright folks,
>>
>> Most peope who have been on the list for a while know we moved from the
>> most static of static websites to Apache CMS a while ago to allow for more
>> regular updating and maintenance of the website.
>>
>> Lewis then put a bunch of work into creating a template for the CMS
>> website
>> and we revamped a lot of the content, but the CMS has a bunch of issues
>> both in the ease of developing a website and also in maintenance so the
>> Infra team are retiring it.
>>
>> My personal opinion(having done some of this in my day job, and discussed
>> similar on some other ASF projects) is we migrate the website to gitsubpub
>> and Jekyll.
>>
>> This will give us the ability to easily stand up the existing website on
>> our own laptops, or development servers make changes and deploy them. Also
>> without the templating system that Apache CMS enforces upon you, its a
>> far
>> quicker development cycle.
>>
>> Of course we could just use standard HTML & Javascript, but part of the
>> reason I'd like to use Jekyll is the fact users can create content using
>> Markdown syntax instead of HTML and Javascript. Jekyll is a static
>> blogging
>> platform, so its designed for frequent updating, and as people may have
>> noticed I've been blogging OODT stuff on my personal blog because the CMS
>> is a pain to update.
>>
>> Has anyone got an opinion? It feels like we did stage one which was make
>> the website easier to update, but stage two is to make the process a lot
>> easier, and standardised.
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> Tom
>>
>
>
Re: OODT Website Changes (Redux)
Posted by Tom Barber <to...@meteorite.bi>.
Also, (playing devils advocate) if it's a word doc why can't you just copy
and paste it into a markdown file? The only major thing you'd be missing
is any images :)
Another plus to a static blogging site is, if you decide it sucks in a few
years time, you just have some html to move somewhere else, it's just a
static website, if you decide WordPress sucked or infra said they'd host
it, then down the line changed their mind, you'd have a much bigger task
on your hands.
Tom
On 3 Apr 2016 00:07, "Tom Barber" <to...@meteorite.bi> wrote:
> Hey Val,
>
> You can write HTML and a bunch of other stuff, but I'm trying to offer up
> a solution that is easy for people to deploy and develop on outside of the
> Apache infrastructure, and markdown, being just text is easy to deploy.
> Also Wordpress etc require databases and backing infra where as Jekyll is
> purely static HTML by the time it is deployed.
>
> I have no idea if Infra would support wordpress anyway, I doubt it, when
> they said they were retiring Apache CMS, it wasn't like "oh but don't worry
> folks, you can stand up a wordpress website", I could be wrong, but that
> was my impression.
>
> At the end of a day, creating a blog post that looks like:
>
> https://raw.githubusercontent.com/maciakl/Sample-Jekyll-Site/master/_posts/2012-02-10-code-snippets.markdown
>
> is much quicker than writing a bunch of HTML, but the Apache CMS is also a
> bit of a lie, because if you think you don't have to write HTML because its
> a CMS, you're sorely mistaken! ;)
>
> Tom
>
>
> On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 12:00 AM, Mallder, Valerie <
> Valerie.Mallder@jhuapl.edu> wrote:
>
>> I am not familiar with Jekyll, but I disagree with using markdown. Why
>> must we write in any kind of markup language? That would suck. Why not just
>> use a better CMS? There are plenty out there. I personally develop websites
>> in Wordpress. It's free and very easy to use. You can edit posts in a
>> WYSIWYG editor. You can also copy-paste from a Word doc into the post. Just
>> my opinion.
>>
>>
>>
>> Sent with Good (www.good.com)
>> ________________________________
>> From: Tom Barber <to...@meteorite.bi>
>> Sent: Saturday, April 2, 2016 6:45:21 PM
>> To: dev@oodt.apache.org
>> Subject: OODT Website Changes (Redux)
>>
>> Alright folks,
>>
>> Most peope who have been on the list for a while know we moved from the
>> most static of static websites to Apache CMS a while ago to allow for more
>> regular updating and maintenance of the website.
>>
>> Lewis then put a bunch of work into creating a template for the CMS
>> website
>> and we revamped a lot of the content, but the CMS has a bunch of issues
>> both in the ease of developing a website and also in maintenance so the
>> Infra team are retiring it.
>>
>> My personal opinion(having done some of this in my day job, and discussed
>> similar on some other ASF projects) is we migrate the website to gitsubpub
>> and Jekyll.
>>
>> This will give us the ability to easily stand up the existing website on
>> our own laptops, or development servers make changes and deploy them. Also
>> without the templating system that Apache CMS enforces upon you, its a
>> far
>> quicker development cycle.
>>
>> Of course we could just use standard HTML & Javascript, but part of the
>> reason I'd like to use Jekyll is the fact users can create content using
>> Markdown syntax instead of HTML and Javascript. Jekyll is a static
>> blogging
>> platform, so its designed for frequent updating, and as people may have
>> noticed I've been blogging OODT stuff on my personal blog because the CMS
>> is a pain to update.
>>
>> Has anyone got an opinion? It feels like we did stage one which was make
>> the website easier to update, but stage two is to make the process a lot
>> easier, and standardised.
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> Tom
>>
>
>
Re: OODT Website Changes (Redux)
Posted by Tom Barber <to...@meteorite.bi>.
Hey Val,
You can write HTML and a bunch of other stuff, but I'm trying to offer up a
solution that is easy for people to deploy and develop on outside of the
Apache infrastructure, and markdown, being just text is easy to deploy.
Also Wordpress etc require databases and backing infra where as Jekyll is
purely static HTML by the time it is deployed.
I have no idea if Infra would support wordpress anyway, I doubt it, when
they said they were retiring Apache CMS, it wasn't like "oh but don't worry
folks, you can stand up a wordpress website", I could be wrong, but that
was my impression.
At the end of a day, creating a blog post that looks like:
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/maciakl/Sample-Jekyll-Site/master/_posts/2012-02-10-code-snippets.markdown
is much quicker than writing a bunch of HTML, but the Apache CMS is also a
bit of a lie, because if you think you don't have to write HTML because its
a CMS, you're sorely mistaken! ;)
Tom
On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 12:00 AM, Mallder, Valerie <
Valerie.Mallder@jhuapl.edu> wrote:
> I am not familiar with Jekyll, but I disagree with using markdown. Why
> must we write in any kind of markup language? That would suck. Why not just
> use a better CMS? There are plenty out there. I personally develop websites
> in Wordpress. It's free and very easy to use. You can edit posts in a
> WYSIWYG editor. You can also copy-paste from a Word doc into the post. Just
> my opinion.
>
>
>
> Sent with Good (www.good.com)
> ________________________________
> From: Tom Barber <to...@meteorite.bi>
> Sent: Saturday, April 2, 2016 6:45:21 PM
> To: dev@oodt.apache.org
> Subject: OODT Website Changes (Redux)
>
> Alright folks,
>
> Most peope who have been on the list for a while know we moved from the
> most static of static websites to Apache CMS a while ago to allow for more
> regular updating and maintenance of the website.
>
> Lewis then put a bunch of work into creating a template for the CMS website
> and we revamped a lot of the content, but the CMS has a bunch of issues
> both in the ease of developing a website and also in maintenance so the
> Infra team are retiring it.
>
> My personal opinion(having done some of this in my day job, and discussed
> similar on some other ASF projects) is we migrate the website to gitsubpub
> and Jekyll.
>
> This will give us the ability to easily stand up the existing website on
> our own laptops, or development servers make changes and deploy them. Also
> without the templating system that Apache CMS enforces upon you, its a far
> quicker development cycle.
>
> Of course we could just use standard HTML & Javascript, but part of the
> reason I'd like to use Jekyll is the fact users can create content using
> Markdown syntax instead of HTML and Javascript. Jekyll is a static blogging
> platform, so its designed for frequent updating, and as people may have
> noticed I've been blogging OODT stuff on my personal blog because the CMS
> is a pain to update.
>
> Has anyone got an opinion? It feels like we did stage one which was make
> the website easier to update, but stage two is to make the process a lot
> easier, and standardised.
>
> Cheers
>
> Tom
>
RE: OODT Website Changes (Redux)
Posted by "Mallder, Valerie" <Va...@jhuapl.edu>.
I am not familiar with Jekyll, but I disagree with using markdown. Why must we write in any kind of markup language? That would suck. Why not just use a better CMS? There are plenty out there. I personally develop websites in Wordpress. It's free and very easy to use. You can edit posts in a WYSIWYG editor. You can also copy-paste from a Word doc into the post. Just my opinion.
Sent with Good (www.good.com)
________________________________
From: Tom Barber <to...@meteorite.bi>
Sent: Saturday, April 2, 2016 6:45:21 PM
To: dev@oodt.apache.org
Subject: OODT Website Changes (Redux)
Alright folks,
Most peope who have been on the list for a while know we moved from the
most static of static websites to Apache CMS a while ago to allow for more
regular updating and maintenance of the website.
Lewis then put a bunch of work into creating a template for the CMS website
and we revamped a lot of the content, but the CMS has a bunch of issues
both in the ease of developing a website and also in maintenance so the
Infra team are retiring it.
My personal opinion(having done some of this in my day job, and discussed
similar on some other ASF projects) is we migrate the website to gitsubpub
and Jekyll.
This will give us the ability to easily stand up the existing website on
our own laptops, or development servers make changes and deploy them. Also
without the templating system that Apache CMS enforces upon you, its a far
quicker development cycle.
Of course we could just use standard HTML & Javascript, but part of the
reason I'd like to use Jekyll is the fact users can create content using
Markdown syntax instead of HTML and Javascript. Jekyll is a static blogging
platform, so its designed for frequent updating, and as people may have
noticed I've been blogging OODT stuff on my personal blog because the CMS
is a pain to update.
Has anyone got an opinion? It feels like we did stage one which was make
the website easier to update, but stage two is to make the process a lot
easier, and standardised.
Cheers
Tom