search

rspec / rspec.github.io

source for rspec.info
http://rspec.info/
Other
15 stars 41 forks source link

Refresh rspec.info for v3 #6

Closed kristianfreeman closed 9 years ago

kristianfreeman commented 11 years ago

In Myron's blog post, he asked for help in updating the rspec.info site. I'd like to contribute with that, but I'm curious what the maintainers think the best way to go about this is.

My immediate thought is that a Github Pages site would be perfect for this kind of thing. I have the current site saved as a Markdown file that could generate a GH Pages site rather quickly, but I'm not sure whether it belongs in a branch here, or in the rspec repo. If it was in a gh-pages branch on this repo, clicking the "fork this" or "see source" etc. would go to the rspec-website repo, which might be different than what people would expect (the rspec/rspec repo).

Either way, I'm really interested in helping out here, so let me know what you guys think is the best way to proceed.

JonRowe commented 11 years ago

Thanks for volunteering :)

The point of this repo is to have the website separate from the code repositories, especially given we have 3 core repositories and more in the surrounding eco system, so I'm in favour of keeping it here. I don't know what the others think about switching to Github pages but I don't see an issue with that. I'm not even sure how it's currently hosted (/cc @dchelimsky @myronmarston )?

I'm sure we can fix up our own fork this links as appropriate :)

/cc @myronmarston @alindeman @samphippen @soulcutter

alindeman commented 11 years ago

The point of this repo is to have the website separate from the code repositories, especially given we have 3 core repositories and more in the surrounding eco system, so I'm in favour of keeping it here. I don't know what the others think about switching to Github pages but I don't see an issue with that.

:heart: @imkmf

:+1: to move to GH pages. It's free and well understood. We could even host the rspec.info domain there after finagling DNS a bit. I'd be glad to make this happen if everyone is on board.

I'm not even sure how it's currently hosted (/cc @dchelimsky @myronmarston )?

I think it's on a machine that @dchelimsky controls. I have access it looks like.

dchelimsky commented 11 years ago

:+1: for GH pages! It's currently hosted on a linode in my account.

Please keep in mind that there are links from blogs to the old rspec.info (currently at http://old.rspec.info) so the current rspec.info redirects out to the yard docs at http://rubydoc.info/.

One thing we don't have is a logo or a visual branding concept. I solicited some designs a couple of years ago from a friend, but never pushed it through the process. BTW, I loved the process Aslak used for selecting a logo for Cucumber. There was an open call for designs and a community vote. I'd like to see something like that happen for RSpec if possible.

Let me know if you have any other questions.

JonRowe commented 11 years ago

Please keep in mind that there are links from blogs to the old rspec.info (currently at http://old.rspec.info) so the current rspec.info redirects out to the yard docs at http://rubydoc.info/.

Github pages works best with a single domain name via a CNAME file so we could use rspec.info (and we get www.rspec.info) but we would leave old.rspec.info as is for now?

We could add another DNS entry to redirect docs.rspec.info to rubydoc.info?

One thing we don't have is a logo or a visual branding concept. I solicited some designs a couple of years ago from a friend, but never pushed it through the process. BTW, I loved the process Aslak used for selecting a logo for Cucumber. There was an open call for designs and a community vote. I'd like to see something like that happen for RSpec if possible.

We should organise that then, happy to put my logo attempt into the mix with public voting ;)

dchelimsky commented 11 years ago

Sorry if I wasn't clear - old.rspec.info is not linked to directly, but it represents the old version. The links I mentioned go to pages on http://rspec.info that don't exist, and they get redirected to the most appropriate URL at rubydoc.info. There is no real need for old.rspec.info to exist any longer.

re: your logo @JonRowe - I think it should definitely be included!

JonRowe commented 11 years ago

Does Jekyll support redirecting pages? I know middleman does (and it can produce gh-pages compatible output)

alindeman commented 11 years ago

Does Jekyll support redirecting pages? I know middleman does (and it can produce gh-pages compatible output)

I don't know offhand. I'm game for whatever makes it easier on the transition. Will GH Pages compile middleman like it does Jekyll, or do you have to commit the artifacts to the repo?

JonRowe commented 11 years ago

No with middleman you have a source branch (master normally) then a rake task that builds the assets and pushes them to gh-pages for you.

myronmarston commented 11 years ago

@calebthompson from Thoughtbot also get in touch today to offer to help. We emailed a bit about it. In retrospect, I should I have started the discussion here to keep it all in public, but I had forgotten we had this rspec-website repo.

:+1: to move to GH pages. It's free and well understood. We could even host the rspec.info domain there after finagling DNS a bit. I'd be glad to make this happen if everyone is on board.

I'm on the fence about using GH pages. I use jekyll for my personal site/blog and I like jekyll a lot...but I host it on heroku (using a free dyno) and that offers some nice flexibility that GH pages doesn't. For example, it makes redirects trivial. Does GH pages provide any benefits over using heroku, given that heroku would allow us the full power and flexibility of rack?

JonRowe commented 11 years ago

I'm pretty :-1: for hosting static content on Heroku, it has contention issues (requests vs dynos), and lag/response time issues, which you might not notice in the states, but them being primarily us-east means that there's around 1s longer response times (minimum) for static content on Heroku vs GitHub pages.

My preferred route is using S3 static hosting, as you get the CDN effect easily, but that's not free (Although my bills are ~$1 a month)

myronmarston commented 11 years ago

I'm pretty :-1: for hosting static content on Heroku, it has contention issues (requests vs dynos), and lag/response time issues, which you might not notice in the states, but them being primarily us-east means that there's around 1s longer response times (minimum) for static content on Heroku vs GitHub pages.

I was under the (potentially mistaken) impression that if you use Heroku's varnish caching layer properly (which is extremely easy with a static site), it'll hit that and immediately respond without going into the normal dyno request queue, thus avoiding the well-publicized problems with Heroku's routing. Anyone know?

Regardless, this is a good point. Thanks, @JonRowe.

JonRowe commented 11 years ago

Cedar has no varnish caching layer

myronmarston commented 11 years ago

Cedar has no varnish caching layer

I did not know that. I've never used Cedar. I guess it shows...

JonRowe commented 11 years ago

:)

And as far as I know you can only create cedar apps these days

On Wednesday, 17 July 2013, Myron Marston wrote:

Cedar has no varnish caching layer

I did not know that. I've never used Cedar. I guess it shows...

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/rspec/rspec-website/issues/6#issuecomment-21095243 .

myronmarston commented 11 years ago

Yep. So n/m on the Heroku idea. I've never used GH pages but it seems like the best option at this point.

calebhearth commented 11 years ago

I think it is perfectly reasonable in any case to start out on gh-pages and respond to any missing feature issues as they come up.

calebhearth commented 11 years ago

Here is, paraphrased, what @myronmarston sent me about the refresh:

New features for RSpec.info, In no particular order:

  • We'd like to get it on a more modern publishing platform -- maybe Jekyll. (I use Jekyll for my own personal site and quite like it). I've also heard good things about middleman but never tried it.
  • It's currently on a VPS that @dchelimsky pays for. If it's a static site a-la Jekyll we can probably move it to Heroku for free hosting, which would be nice. (Note: sounds like we've already established that we'll start with GitHub Pages and go from there)
  • It's not a particularly attractive site, so a new design would be good.
  • We'd like to host the YARD docs at the rspec.info site rather than directing people to rspec.info.
  • Some kind of "getting started" guide would be cool.
  • Maybe some kind of core team / alumni page, like Rails has?
  • It would be nice to have some kind of blog on the site, so that when we blog about RSpec it can go there rather than on our personal site.

gh-pages are dead simple to set up and use. Jekyll will make it easy to add a blog, and if people end up wanting to keep the posts on their own site that isn't too difficult to link to. I'll start working to get a landing page with similar content to the current one in place so that we've got something to work from.

The typical setup for a gh-pages repo is to name it /.github.com. I don't know if we want to keep history, but it might be worth either setting up an rspec/rspec.github.com repo or moving this one there. I recommend the former so that we aren't hosting the current site in two places, and I haven't had a chance to look at how static this repo is.

As far as a design refresh, probably the only constraints will be that we need to show code attractively and that we need to match the new logo, so we probably won't be able to get started on that until the logo is decided.

Really excited to get started.

kristianfreeman commented 11 years ago

Heh, this blew up while I was away from GitHub :)

@calebthompson - let me know how I can help! Not sure if we should be hacking on our own repo or on a rspec.github.com repo, but I'll pitch in any way I can.

kristianfreeman commented 11 years ago

Worth mentioning that I converted the existing rspec.info site in Markdown in a gist: that could be a good base for whatever the next version looks like.

myronmarston commented 11 years ago

BTW, I love the idea of having a logo contest. @imkmf / @calebthompson: do you two want to work together to put run the logo contest? I'd be happy to promote it and make it clear that it has our official endorsement and isn't just some side thing.

kristianfreeman commented 11 years ago

@myronmarston -- I'll shoot an email to @calebthompson in the morning!

base10 commented 11 years ago

Just checking in from the RSpec 3 post. I'm interested in helping. I use MiddleMan for my personal blog and like the idea of a static generator / gh-pages, however it shakes out.

derekprior commented 11 years ago

@myronmarston : I opened #7 to discuss the logo competition. I spoke to @calebthompson this morning, and we both thought that could be run separately from and concurrently with the site overhaul. I don't mind taking up the mantle of that process, at least to start.

calebhearth commented 11 years ago

I've gone ahead and created https://github.com/calebthompson/rspec.github.com with a basic import of the rspec.info homepage. At some point it should probably be moved over to the rspec org, but for the short term work can start there. I'll throw together some issues from my previous conversation with Myron and we can start discussion and work there.

JonRowe commented 11 years ago

I have a preference for not using the <username>.github.com repo name for Github pages because it forces you to use master for your page source as opposed to gh-pages just FYI

JonRowe commented 9 years ago

A year later it seemed I changed my mind, you can see we're now running rspec.github.io ;)