New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Is GitBook still alive? #1808

Open
drobiazko opened this Issue Jun 7, 2017 · 97 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
@drobiazko

drobiazko commented Jun 7, 2017

Is it worth to consider GitBook? I have my doubts due to:

  • it seems like there is nobody reading support emails. Even as a paying customer I'm being ignored.
  • last blog post is now 4 months old
  • last commit to this repo was done more than 2 moths ago
  • last tweets is almost 2 moths old
  • many issues are open since months without any comments
  • many pull requests are waiting to be merged since months

Any ideas?

@nagim

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@nagim

nagim Jun 7, 2017

Hi,

Yes, it's still alive.
The lack of activity in the GitHub repo only shows that the work is currently being done in other repos that are not public.
The team is in the middle of a complete overhaul of the whole GitBook experience (that's why you didn't notice activity in the repos, as it will be a different approach compared to the existing one), which takes a lot of time and effort now. It is currently in beta testing phase, I believe.

I agree that a lack of response to support emails can be frustrating, I guess with this amount of work for a team of 5 or so people, support emails processing might be very slow.

I'm a paying customer as well and I often write to the Slack channel which often allows for speedier responses.

Cheers,
Imre

nagim commented Jun 7, 2017

Hi,

Yes, it's still alive.
The lack of activity in the GitHub repo only shows that the work is currently being done in other repos that are not public.
The team is in the middle of a complete overhaul of the whole GitBook experience (that's why you didn't notice activity in the repos, as it will be a different approach compared to the existing one), which takes a lot of time and effort now. It is currently in beta testing phase, I believe.

I agree that a lack of response to support emails can be frustrating, I guess with this amount of work for a team of 5 or so people, support emails processing might be very slow.

I'm a paying customer as well and I often write to the Slack channel which often allows for speedier responses.

Cheers,
Imre

@drobiazko

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@drobiazko

drobiazko Jun 7, 2017

Thank you for your answer @nagim.

I understand your arguments about the new GitBook experience and the size of the team. However the guys behind GitBook need to learn how to handle customers. The only reason I purchased an organizational plan was Individual support. You can have the best product in the world but if you ignore your customers you will lose all of them. You just must not concentrate on delivering new version of your product without helping your paying customers.

drobiazko commented Jun 7, 2017

Thank you for your answer @nagim.

I understand your arguments about the new GitBook experience and the size of the team. However the guys behind GitBook need to learn how to handle customers. The only reason I purchased an organizational plan was Individual support. You can have the best product in the world but if you ignore your customers you will lose all of them. You just must not concentrate on delivering new version of your product without helping your paying customers.

@nagim

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@nagim

nagim Jun 7, 2017

Yes, you're right on this.
Again, try to contact them on Slack via a direct message. That usually works best for me.

nagim commented Jun 7, 2017

Yes, you're right on this.
Again, try to contact them on Slack via a direct message. That usually works best for me.

@drobiazko

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@drobiazko

drobiazko Jun 7, 2017

I asked my questions on Slack as well. Unfortunately it was not answered either.

drobiazko commented Jun 7, 2017

I asked my questions on Slack as well. Unfortunately it was not answered either.

@nagim

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@nagim

nagim Jun 7, 2017

The one regarding variables? If you come online, I might be able to help.

nagim commented Jun 7, 2017

The one regarding variables? If you come online, I might be able to help.

@AaronO

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@AaronO

AaronO Jun 7, 2017

Member

Hi @drobiazko,

First and foremost I am sorry if you've experienced delayed replies (could you email me at aaron@gitbook.com with the specific issues you need help with ?), I'm travelling at the moment but will get back to you when in a few hours when I'm back.

Secondly, GitBook is very much alive, we're beta testing a massive product release that solves many of the core product issues we gathered from users (by talking with users and running surveys).

I'm sorry you've encountered issues, email me or ping me on slack so I can help you with your immediate issues.

Kind Regards,
Aaron

Member

AaronO commented Jun 7, 2017

Hi @drobiazko,

First and foremost I am sorry if you've experienced delayed replies (could you email me at aaron@gitbook.com with the specific issues you need help with ?), I'm travelling at the moment but will get back to you when in a few hours when I'm back.

Secondly, GitBook is very much alive, we're beta testing a massive product release that solves many of the core product issues we gathered from users (by talking with users and running surveys).

I'm sorry you've encountered issues, email me or ping me on slack so I can help you with your immediate issues.

Kind Regards,
Aaron

@zuker

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@zuker

zuker Jun 7, 2017

Hmm, it's strange to make clients struggle to get paid support...

zuker commented Jun 7, 2017

Hmm, it's strange to make clients struggle to get paid support...

@melvinchng

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@melvinchng

melvinchng Jun 8, 2017

@AaronO I sent you an email regarding student discount. I have been trying to contact the team for more than a month now and I receive zero response.

melvinchng commented Jun 8, 2017

@AaronO I sent you an email regarding student discount. I have been trying to contact the team for more than a month now and I receive zero response.

@reviewher

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@reviewher

reviewher Jun 12, 2017

Anyone find an alternative to gitbook?

reviewher commented Jun 12, 2017

Anyone find an alternative to gitbook?

@pnicoll

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@pnicoll

pnicoll Jun 13, 2017

The team is in the middle of a complete overhaul of the whole GitBook experience

We find this troubling.

pnicoll commented Jun 13, 2017

The team is in the middle of a complete overhaul of the whole GitBook experience

We find this troubling.

@AaronO

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@AaronO

AaronO Jun 13, 2017

Member

@pnicoll It's important to highlight that we're doing this as a result of user-feedback:

... product release that solves many of the core product issues we gathered from users (by talking with users and running surveys).

We spent a lot of time talking with our users, to really understand the major pain points. We've been beta-testing the new-release with a few organizations over the past few weeks with solid feedback so far.

As a result here are some of the improvements currently implemented in the new release:

  • Unified read & write experience (much much simpler UI/UX)
  • Simple and clean company branding out of the box (branding is super-important for public product/API docs)
    • Upload a logo and pick a color (we automatically suggest one from your logo)
    • Set custom links in header
    • Header logo & favicon
    • It takes seconds not hours (no need to write CSS/HTML/JS or plugins ...)
  • Editor now natively supports editing rich content (hints, embeds, api methods, ...), no longer requires a templating syntax !
  • Most common / popular plugin-powered features are now implemented 1st party (non-exhaustive list):
    • Title anchors
    • Collapsible TOC entries
    • Image captions
    • Hints / Callouts
    • Rich embeds (to embed external content, e.g: YouTube videos)
    • And more ...
  • Relevant & fast content-wide search (works on users and comments too !)

Overall things are an order of magnitude simpler, more reliable and less quirky.

@pnicoll I would love to talk one-on-one over Slack or Skype/Hangouts and hear your feedback (and potential concerns).

I've had a call with @drobiazko and am working with them to help streamline their docs (they have some special requirements that no documentation solution will solve out-of-the-box).

Member

AaronO commented Jun 13, 2017

@pnicoll It's important to highlight that we're doing this as a result of user-feedback:

... product release that solves many of the core product issues we gathered from users (by talking with users and running surveys).

We spent a lot of time talking with our users, to really understand the major pain points. We've been beta-testing the new-release with a few organizations over the past few weeks with solid feedback so far.

As a result here are some of the improvements currently implemented in the new release:

  • Unified read & write experience (much much simpler UI/UX)
  • Simple and clean company branding out of the box (branding is super-important for public product/API docs)
    • Upload a logo and pick a color (we automatically suggest one from your logo)
    • Set custom links in header
    • Header logo & favicon
    • It takes seconds not hours (no need to write CSS/HTML/JS or plugins ...)
  • Editor now natively supports editing rich content (hints, embeds, api methods, ...), no longer requires a templating syntax !
  • Most common / popular plugin-powered features are now implemented 1st party (non-exhaustive list):
    • Title anchors
    • Collapsible TOC entries
    • Image captions
    • Hints / Callouts
    • Rich embeds (to embed external content, e.g: YouTube videos)
    • And more ...
  • Relevant & fast content-wide search (works on users and comments too !)

Overall things are an order of magnitude simpler, more reliable and less quirky.

@pnicoll I would love to talk one-on-one over Slack or Skype/Hangouts and hear your feedback (and potential concerns).

I've had a call with @drobiazko and am working with them to help streamline their docs (they have some special requirements that no documentation solution will solve out-of-the-box).

@pnicoll

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@pnicoll

pnicoll Jun 13, 2017

@AaronO That all sounds great, especially collapsible TOC entries (using a plug-in then clicking on a second-level TOC associated to an anchor link breaks the search entirely, which we told you about in January; see #1670, in particular @nagim 's comment @SamyPesse this issue is quite serious, basically you cannot use search if you have scrolled down in a page, because it crashes instantly). As a result, we can only have level 1 TOC entries, and some of our chapters are massive, so our users have to scroll or search instead of immediately finding what they're looking for in the TOC.

What worries us is what might be broken with this overhaul.

pnicoll commented Jun 13, 2017

@AaronO That all sounds great, especially collapsible TOC entries (using a plug-in then clicking on a second-level TOC associated to an anchor link breaks the search entirely, which we told you about in January; see #1670, in particular @nagim 's comment @SamyPesse this issue is quite serious, basically you cannot use search if you have scrolled down in a page, because it crashes instantly). As a result, we can only have level 1 TOC entries, and some of our chapters are massive, so our users have to scroll or search instead of immediately finding what they're looking for in the TOC.

What worries us is what might be broken with this overhaul.

@AaronO

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@AaronO

AaronO Jun 13, 2017

Member

@pnicoll The error you encountered is precisely a symptom of the underlaying problem that we're fixing (I'm sorry that you encountered it).

Namely that GitBook requires plugins for:

  • Branding (a must-have for companies, which today have to painfully write custom HTML/CSS/...)
  • Improvements (e.g: title-anchors, better search, etc ...), that should be built-in
  • To include rich content (youtube videos, iframes, etc ...)
    However:
  • Most plugins are developed by 3rd party devs, not the core gitbook team
  • Plugins may conflict with one-another (or builtin plugins, such as the crash you saw)
  • They require editing book.json or using a templating syntax (for end-users)
  • Which isn't supported by the WYSIWYG editor (it would be impossible for us to provide a tailored editing experience for arbitrary 3rd-party plugins)
  • May break your builds (and prevent your content from updating ... I hate that this is even possible ...)

Overall this exposes a lot of unnecessary complexity and technicalities that end-users (you guys) have to worry about, that's frustrating and a subpar UX.

The core focus of this release is building a much simpler (UI & UX) and reliable experience for our users. Everything a team needs to write their documentation should be simple, reliable and "just work"™. No build failures, plugin conflicts, sync errors, ...

I would love to jump on a call, understand your specific use-case & needs, demo you the beta so you can get a better understanding of where we're going (and see for yourself if it truly is simpler/better).

Member

AaronO commented Jun 13, 2017

@pnicoll The error you encountered is precisely a symptom of the underlaying problem that we're fixing (I'm sorry that you encountered it).

Namely that GitBook requires plugins for:

  • Branding (a must-have for companies, which today have to painfully write custom HTML/CSS/...)
  • Improvements (e.g: title-anchors, better search, etc ...), that should be built-in
  • To include rich content (youtube videos, iframes, etc ...)
    However:
  • Most plugins are developed by 3rd party devs, not the core gitbook team
  • Plugins may conflict with one-another (or builtin plugins, such as the crash you saw)
  • They require editing book.json or using a templating syntax (for end-users)
  • Which isn't supported by the WYSIWYG editor (it would be impossible for us to provide a tailored editing experience for arbitrary 3rd-party plugins)
  • May break your builds (and prevent your content from updating ... I hate that this is even possible ...)

Overall this exposes a lot of unnecessary complexity and technicalities that end-users (you guys) have to worry about, that's frustrating and a subpar UX.

The core focus of this release is building a much simpler (UI & UX) and reliable experience for our users. Everything a team needs to write their documentation should be simple, reliable and "just work"™. No build failures, plugin conflicts, sync errors, ...

I would love to jump on a call, understand your specific use-case & needs, demo you the beta so you can get a better understanding of where we're going (and see for yourself if it truly is simpler/better).

@AaronO

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@AaronO

AaronO Jun 13, 2017

Member

We will announce the beta (through an official blog post) and have a landing page with more info very soon.

We wanted to have tangible results and feedback (from beta-testers) before announcing it.

Member

AaronO commented Jun 13, 2017

We will announce the beta (through an official blog post) and have a landing page with more info very soon.

We wanted to have tangible results and feedback (from beta-testers) before announcing it.

@greatdreams

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@greatdreams

greatdreams Jun 26, 2017

Is there any latest developing information about gitbook and gitbook editor?

greatdreams commented Jun 26, 2017

Is there any latest developing information about gitbook and gitbook editor?

@FibreFoX

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@FibreFoX

FibreFoX Jun 28, 2017

@AaronO Don't want to be that picky, but how about writing some "CURRENTLY COMPLETE REWORK IN PROGRESS" inside the readme-file? This way you can communicate with non-slack users and github-only visitors.

It get's very annoying to not get response to issues like #1784, which blocks pull-requests for the current version, which makes this project seem to be dead.

FibreFoX commented Jun 28, 2017

@AaronO Don't want to be that picky, but how about writing some "CURRENTLY COMPLETE REWORK IN PROGRESS" inside the readme-file? This way you can communicate with non-slack users and github-only visitors.

It get's very annoying to not get response to issues like #1784, which blocks pull-requests for the current version, which makes this project seem to be dead.

@kozi

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@kozi

kozi Jul 8, 2017

We will announce the beta (through an official blog post) and have a landing page with more info very soon.

Can you say what very soon means?

kozi commented Jul 8, 2017

We will announce the beta (through an official blog post) and have a landing page with more info very soon.

Can you say what very soon means?

@pnicoll

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@pnicoll

pnicoll Jul 12, 2017

It's been 29 days since we've heard from @AaronO, so "very soon" seems to mean nothing.

GitBook is still billing me, however.

pnicoll commented Jul 12, 2017

It's been 29 days since we've heard from @AaronO, so "very soon" seems to mean nothing.

GitBook is still billing me, however.

@AaronO

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@AaronO

AaronO Jul 12, 2017

Member

@kozi @pnicoll We'll be releasing a blog post and homepage for the new beta this week, where users will be able to request beta access (we're aiming for Friday but it might come out tomorrow, because we want to give everyone an update and showcase the new improvements and what we've been working on).

We've been working hard on the beta, you can see the release notes for the latest beta releases here: https://betadocs.gitbook.com/changelog

If you anyone has specific questions, or things they would like to see improved in GitBook (and thus tackled by this new release) I would love to jump on a quick call with them

(You can reach me at aaron@gitbook.com)

We've been working on this beta to solve the major key issues we heard from our users, a lot of which were non-trivial, if anyone in this thread has any issues please contact me directly.


I also followed up with Igor (@drobiazko) who originally started this thread, had a call with him regarding their use-case, which admittedly is a bit of an edge-case, so I explained a few approaches that would work.
Since it's unlikely that we'll implement 1st-class support for white-labelling a single project into multiple live projects, that share all their content but differ in branding and some URL rewriting.
My recommended approach was to write a small proxy service on their end that's aware of all the custom branding they want to do and uses our APIs to pull in the relevant content and rewrite it before rendering to the end-user. Allowing them to have full control over their white-labelling logic and have one simple repo of content to maintain.

Member

AaronO commented Jul 12, 2017

@kozi @pnicoll We'll be releasing a blog post and homepage for the new beta this week, where users will be able to request beta access (we're aiming for Friday but it might come out tomorrow, because we want to give everyone an update and showcase the new improvements and what we've been working on).

We've been working hard on the beta, you can see the release notes for the latest beta releases here: https://betadocs.gitbook.com/changelog

If you anyone has specific questions, or things they would like to see improved in GitBook (and thus tackled by this new release) I would love to jump on a quick call with them

(You can reach me at aaron@gitbook.com)

We've been working on this beta to solve the major key issues we heard from our users, a lot of which were non-trivial, if anyone in this thread has any issues please contact me directly.


I also followed up with Igor (@drobiazko) who originally started this thread, had a call with him regarding their use-case, which admittedly is a bit of an edge-case, so I explained a few approaches that would work.
Since it's unlikely that we'll implement 1st-class support for white-labelling a single project into multiple live projects, that share all their content but differ in branding and some URL rewriting.
My recommended approach was to write a small proxy service on their end that's aware of all the custom branding they want to do and uses our APIs to pull in the relevant content and rewrite it before rendering to the end-user. Allowing them to have full control over their white-labelling logic and have one simple repo of content to maintain.

@pnicoll

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@pnicoll

pnicoll Jul 12, 2017

@AaronO Thanks for the update.

What would be really nice would be the ability to set table column widths. Overriding with HTML (which I have to do in long cells that contain a combination of regular text and bulleted lists, for example) doesn't work, nor does forcing a column width with non-breaking spaces ( ) for different tables that have the same column headers. As a result, I have tables with the same headers but different-sized columns, which makes my documentation look sloppy.

pnicoll commented Jul 12, 2017

@AaronO Thanks for the update.

What would be really nice would be the ability to set table column widths. Overriding with HTML (which I have to do in long cells that contain a combination of regular text and bulleted lists, for example) doesn't work, nor does forcing a column width with non-breaking spaces ( ) for different tables that have the same column headers. As a result, I have tables with the same headers but different-sized columns, which makes my documentation look sloppy.

@AaronO

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@AaronO

AaronO Jul 12, 2017

Member

@pnicoll Writing custom HTML isn't a great solution, because it's fairly technical, fragile and a bad practice. I think what you're hitting here with tables is possibly a markdown limitation.

With this new version we can have smarter editing & rendering logic, to accommodate for those kind of situations.

We haven't yet done much work specifically on tables, because nobody has given us table-specific feedback so far.

I personally avoid putting too much content inside tables, and often opt for titles to group that content together. However, I don't know enough about your use-case to know if that makes sense for you.

Would love to jump on a quick call if you're free tomorrow or Friday to better understand your tables issue and see if we can fix it.

Member

AaronO commented Jul 12, 2017

@pnicoll Writing custom HTML isn't a great solution, because it's fairly technical, fragile and a bad practice. I think what you're hitting here with tables is possibly a markdown limitation.

With this new version we can have smarter editing & rendering logic, to accommodate for those kind of situations.

We haven't yet done much work specifically on tables, because nobody has given us table-specific feedback so far.

I personally avoid putting too much content inside tables, and often opt for titles to group that content together. However, I don't know enough about your use-case to know if that makes sense for you.

Would love to jump on a quick call if you're free tomorrow or Friday to better understand your tables issue and see if we can fix it.

@nagim

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@nagim

nagim Jul 12, 2017

@AaronO I have sent you table-specific feedback/suggestions before, too. If it got lost somehow in the meantime, let me know, I will resend it.

nagim commented Jul 12, 2017

@AaronO I have sent you table-specific feedback/suggestions before, too. If it got lost somehow in the meantime, let me know, I will resend it.

@pnicoll

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@pnicoll

pnicoll Jul 12, 2017

@AaronO I understand that markdown tables are limited. If the smarter rendering logic can properly render non-breaking spaces to force column width (e.g. two tables with the same headers, so |Column header 1      |Column header 2| for both) then I'd be happy. Having different column widths for tables with the same headers makes it look like I don't care about formatting, when in fact it's the exact opposite.

Due to some of the content of my tables I often have to use HTML, and in markdown tables, everything in an <ol> or <ul> has to be in one line; there's no way around it, believe me, I've tried. So I end up with rows that look like this:

|Template|Selection of workflow templates to be tested directly, customizable and usable in the "By default" list or in the "library"<p></p><p>Default:</p><ul><li>2 levels approval</li><li>Parallel tasks</li><li>Simple approval</li><li>Simple request</li></ul><p>Library:</p><ul><li>Expense report</li><li>Software helpdesk</li><li>Investment application</li><li>IT Changes</li><li>IT Clearance application</li><li>Leave application</li><li>New Product Creation</li><li>Work Order</li></ul><p>A customized workflow template can be created and deployed on the server with the following folder and file structure:</p><p>\wfgen\App_Data\Templates\Processes\[language]\[folder name]\[process name]v[x].xml</p><p>Example:<p>\wfgen\App_Data\Templates\Processes \En\MyCompany\MY_PROCESSv1.xml</p><p>**Note:** Only processes with forms created with the built-in form designer can be used as workflow templates.|

This is all one row.

pnicoll commented Jul 12, 2017

@AaronO I understand that markdown tables are limited. If the smarter rendering logic can properly render non-breaking spaces to force column width (e.g. two tables with the same headers, so |Column header 1&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;|Column header 2| for both) then I'd be happy. Having different column widths for tables with the same headers makes it look like I don't care about formatting, when in fact it's the exact opposite.

Due to some of the content of my tables I often have to use HTML, and in markdown tables, everything in an <ol> or <ul> has to be in one line; there's no way around it, believe me, I've tried. So I end up with rows that look like this:

|Template|Selection of workflow templates to be tested directly, customizable and usable in the "By default" list or in the "library"<p></p><p>Default:</p><ul><li>2 levels approval</li><li>Parallel tasks</li><li>Simple approval</li><li>Simple request</li></ul><p>Library:</p><ul><li>Expense report</li><li>Software helpdesk</li><li>Investment application</li><li>IT Changes</li><li>IT Clearance application</li><li>Leave application</li><li>New Product Creation</li><li>Work Order</li></ul><p>A customized workflow template can be created and deployed on the server with the following folder and file structure:</p><p>\wfgen\App_Data\Templates\Processes\[language]\[folder name]\[process name]v[x].xml</p><p>Example:<p>\wfgen\App_Data\Templates\Processes \En\MyCompany\MY_PROCESSv1.xml</p><p>**Note:** Only processes with forms created with the built-in form designer can be used as workflow templates.|

This is all one row.

@AaronO

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@AaronO

AaronO Jul 12, 2017

Member

@nagim Nope Imre, I've still got the feedback you sent me regarding table cells and the ability to merge cells.

@pnicoll Do you have a link to share so I can see what it looks like ? Would be great if you had an example of desired output in raw HTML, compared to our current output.

Member

AaronO commented Jul 12, 2017

@nagim Nope Imre, I've still got the feedback you sent me regarding table cells and the ability to merge cells.

@pnicoll Do you have a link to share so I can see what it looks like ? Would be great if you had an example of desired output in raw HTML, compared to our current output.

@AaronO

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@AaronO

AaronO Jul 12, 2017

Member

@nagim @pnicoll Happy to talk more about tables, but we should probably move this conversation to https://github.com/GitbookIO/feedback, to not clutter this already long thread and go off-topic.

Would be great to have that feedback grouped into relevant issues (one on merged table-cells, another on alignment) with "current output/behavior" and "expected output/behavior" for each.

Member

AaronO commented Jul 12, 2017

@nagim @pnicoll Happy to talk more about tables, but we should probably move this conversation to https://github.com/GitbookIO/feedback, to not clutter this already long thread and go off-topic.

Would be great to have that feedback grouped into relevant issues (one on merged table-cells, another on alignment) with "current output/behavior" and "expected output/behavior" for each.

@lbeltrame

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@lbeltrame

lbeltrame Jul 15, 2017

@AaronO Given the beta links, and the fact that even the mentions do not say much about the toolchain, the question is: will the toolchain keep on being open source, or will it be irreversibly tied to gitbook.com? I use the toolchain for convenience, and would never consider it if I can't self host the content painlessly (note: the competition has a similar and equally questionable stance).

lbeltrame commented Jul 15, 2017

@AaronO Given the beta links, and the fact that even the mentions do not say much about the toolchain, the question is: will the toolchain keep on being open source, or will it be irreversibly tied to gitbook.com? I use the toolchain for convenience, and would never consider it if I can't self host the content painlessly (note: the competition has a similar and equally questionable stance).

@AaronO

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@AaronO

AaronO Aug 3, 2017

Member

@lbeltrame Sorry for the late reply, I was out of the office for a while following a medical operation.

In short: the toolchain will continue to exist in some form, but it needs to evolve.

Our goal is to enable teams to write great documentation (external API & Product docs, internal / team docs, ...). Everything else is a means to an end.

Samy and I built the first version of GitBook because we believed that documents should be simpler, smarter and richer.

We did not stop at building the toolchain because we knew that by itself it was only a small part of what teams need (editing, hosting, collaboration, ...).

Given that we're a small team with limited resources, we have to chose our battles.
I don't think it would help our users or the project to focus on "self-hosting", it would only increase fragmentation and complexity ...

We're committed to building a great product for our users (that's simple, reliable and powerful), we believe in open-source and will continue to contribute (we're not looking to vendor-lock anyone) and have exciting new tech and APIs that are radically better for devs than what we have today (plugins, templating syntax, ...).

If you believe that an open-source project diverges from your goals, you have the freedom to fork it.

Member

AaronO commented Aug 3, 2017

@lbeltrame Sorry for the late reply, I was out of the office for a while following a medical operation.

In short: the toolchain will continue to exist in some form, but it needs to evolve.

Our goal is to enable teams to write great documentation (external API & Product docs, internal / team docs, ...). Everything else is a means to an end.

Samy and I built the first version of GitBook because we believed that documents should be simpler, smarter and richer.

We did not stop at building the toolchain because we knew that by itself it was only a small part of what teams need (editing, hosting, collaboration, ...).

Given that we're a small team with limited resources, we have to chose our battles.
I don't think it would help our users or the project to focus on "self-hosting", it would only increase fragmentation and complexity ...

We're committed to building a great product for our users (that's simple, reliable and powerful), we believe in open-source and will continue to contribute (we're not looking to vendor-lock anyone) and have exciting new tech and APIs that are radically better for devs than what we have today (plugins, templating syntax, ...).

If you believe that an open-source project diverges from your goals, you have the freedom to fork it.

@lbeltrame

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@lbeltrame

lbeltrame Aug 3, 2017

Basically, it's not going to be the focus, in some way, but you'll leave the toolchain open for others to improve, should the need arise.

That's fine, and I understand your needs. They simply do not align with mine (I'm using gitbook to write non-technical books, which are self-hosted), so I'll pick another tool (pandoc) with a different scope.

That said, thanks for your work on GitBook because it did help me when I started writing.

lbeltrame commented Aug 3, 2017

Basically, it's not going to be the focus, in some way, but you'll leave the toolchain open for others to improve, should the need arise.

That's fine, and I understand your needs. They simply do not align with mine (I'm using gitbook to write non-technical books, which are self-hosted), so I'll pick another tool (pandoc) with a different scope.

That said, thanks for your work on GitBook because it did help me when I started writing.

@kirtan403

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@kirtan403

kirtan403 Aug 7, 2017

@AaronO That's really sad to here that, in some form the open toolchain will stop updating as you are focusing on building a product for consumer. Self hosting is one of the key factor which made gitbook popular, IMHO.

I just hope that toolchain will be in the focus again..

kirtan403 commented Aug 7, 2017

@AaronO That's really sad to here that, in some form the open toolchain will stop updating as you are focusing on building a product for consumer. Self hosting is one of the key factor which made gitbook popular, IMHO.

I just hope that toolchain will be in the focus again..

@develar

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@develar

develar Aug 31, 2017

Why I still use Gitbook instead of another static site generator — because without extra customisation you get really great documentation site. Just write docs and gitbook build. No need to tweak style, search another better default theme and so on.

The only problem now — anchors navigation doesn't work reliably (a lot of reports about it in this issue tracker). And I see that in the beta version it is fixed.

I totally understand, that my usage is out of your product scope — I edit docs using IDE and publish to Netlify. But as far I see, in any case for gitbook.com some tool should be used to convert md to html. Not clear for me — why beta gitbook theme / new generator is not developed here as beta version/branch. Why users cannot use (and test) beta version of new generator.

Anyway, still hope that in the next several months it will be updated. Thanks for a great product.

develar commented Aug 31, 2017

Why I still use Gitbook instead of another static site generator — because without extra customisation you get really great documentation site. Just write docs and gitbook build. No need to tweak style, search another better default theme and so on.

The only problem now — anchors navigation doesn't work reliably (a lot of reports about it in this issue tracker). And I see that in the beta version it is fixed.

I totally understand, that my usage is out of your product scope — I edit docs using IDE and publish to Netlify. But as far I see, in any case for gitbook.com some tool should be used to convert md to html. Not clear for me — why beta gitbook theme / new generator is not developed here as beta version/branch. Why users cannot use (and test) beta version of new generator.

Anyway, still hope that in the next several months it will be updated. Thanks for a great product.

@L-u-k-e

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@L-u-k-e

L-u-k-e Jul 3, 2018

@develar I came to this thread specifically because I saw the note on the V2 site about the CLI not being provided anymore and was hoping someone would have posted a free alternative product, so THANK YOU :) mkDocs + material theme looks beautiful.

L-u-k-e commented Jul 3, 2018

@develar I came to this thread specifically because I saw the note on the V2 site about the CLI not being provided anymore and was hoping someone would have posted a free alternative product, so THANK YOU :) mkDocs + material theme looks beautiful.

@YoungJaeChoung

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@YoungJaeChoung

YoungJaeChoung Jul 17, 2018

I`m new to gitbook and have a trouble on using gitbook.

Editing on the web is extremely slow.
Editing Program is not working on login.

I really want to use gitbook. But it makes me crazy.

Is Gitbook still alive...? (Ask Again)


After Question. I got some information.

  1. Not yet desktop app.

I read the article about update (https://docs.gitbook.com/v2-changes/important-differences)

Desktop app
The new version does not currently have a desktop editor app. Our efforts are concentrated on the web version so we can focus on quality and reliability first. We are considering releasing a Desktop app in the future, but we have no public release-date at this time.

2. Atom Editor

I heard that atom editor is good to use as gitbook editor.

  1. Github connection with Gitbook

I have to try it.
(Atom is just editor, which make things easy to write makrdown and use github)

YoungJaeChoung commented Jul 17, 2018

I`m new to gitbook and have a trouble on using gitbook.

Editing on the web is extremely slow.
Editing Program is not working on login.

I really want to use gitbook. But it makes me crazy.

Is Gitbook still alive...? (Ask Again)


After Question. I got some information.

  1. Not yet desktop app.

I read the article about update (https://docs.gitbook.com/v2-changes/important-differences)

Desktop app
The new version does not currently have a desktop editor app. Our efforts are concentrated on the web version so we can focus on quality and reliability first. We are considering releasing a Desktop app in the future, but we have no public release-date at this time.

2. Atom Editor

I heard that atom editor is good to use as gitbook editor.

  1. Github connection with Gitbook

I have to try it.
(Atom is just editor, which make things easy to write makrdown and use github)

@istiti

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@istiti

istiti Jul 17, 2018

gitbook has been acquired not by a multinational but by a new way of thinking needs. donno maybe durning some vacations the real click come on (joke)

istiti commented Jul 17, 2018

gitbook has been acquired not by a multinational but by a new way of thinking needs. donno maybe durning some vacations the real click come on (joke)

@aleung

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@aleung

aleung Jul 18, 2018

@AaronO Since you are not going to open source the GitBook V2, you'd better rename this repo to gitbook-legacy to not make people confusing.

aleung commented Jul 18, 2018

@AaronO Since you are not going to open source the GitBook V2, you'd better rename this repo to gitbook-legacy to not make people confusing.

@Undistraction

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@Undistraction

Undistraction Jul 18, 2018

For anyone else looking for an alternative now that Markdown support has been removed, I'd recommend taking a look at Gatsby. It's a static-site generator and not documentation-specific, but can easily be used to generate docs and has first-class Markdown support. There are lots of great starters available. When paired with Contentful or Zeit Now or Github Pages it's a very slick workflow.

Undistraction commented Jul 18, 2018

For anyone else looking for an alternative now that Markdown support has been removed, I'd recommend taking a look at Gatsby. It's a static-site generator and not documentation-specific, but can easily be used to generate docs and has first-class Markdown support. There are lots of great starters available. When paired with Contentful or Zeit Now or Github Pages it's a very slick workflow.

@develar

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@develar

develar Jul 18, 2018

When paired with Contentful or Zeit Now or Github Pages it's a very slick workflow.

For hosting I recommend Netlify (free, one-click ssl for custom domain).

develar commented Jul 18, 2018

When paired with Contentful or Zeit Now or Github Pages it's a very slick workflow.

For hosting I recommend Netlify (free, one-click ssl for custom domain).

@Undistraction

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@Undistraction

Undistraction Jul 18, 2018

@develar I actually meant Netlify instead of Contentful. Thanks. There is also a great CMS for Netlify for editing content which makes collaboration easy.

Undistraction commented Jul 18, 2018

@develar I actually meant Netlify instead of Contentful. Thanks. There is also a great CMS for Netlify for editing content which makes collaboration easy.

@pmkay

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@pmkay

pmkay Jul 18, 2018

did gitbook get hacked? why is it marked as harmful?

image

pmkay commented Jul 18, 2018

did gitbook get hacked? why is it marked as harmful?

image

@pnicoll

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@pnicoll

pnicoll Jul 18, 2018

I get that too.

pnicoll commented Jul 18, 2018

I get that too.

@fedorov

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@fedorov

fedorov Jul 18, 2018

Ok, now I am also voting for closing this issue. It became a "catch all" for anything-gitbook.

This is not an official help channel, you should check out their Slack. Related to the issue above, see below from Slack:

image

fedorov commented Jul 18, 2018

Ok, now I am also voting for closing this issue. It became a "catch all" for anything-gitbook.

This is not an official help channel, you should check out their Slack. Related to the issue above, see below from Slack:

image

@pmkay

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@pmkay

pmkay Jul 18, 2018

noted, thanks @fedorov

pmkay commented Jul 18, 2018

noted, thanks @fedorov

@ervinb

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@ervinb

ervinb Jul 18, 2018

Just to chime in on the above, if you're reading a book and can't load the page, just do a Google search with the full URL, and click on the green arrow (after the link) > Cached.

ervinb commented Jul 18, 2018

Just to chime in on the above, if you're reading a book and can't load the page, just do a Google search with the full URL, and click on the green arrow (after the link) > Cached.

@Undistraction

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@Undistraction

Undistraction Jul 27, 2018

For anyone else looking for an alternative now that Gitbook has removed Markdown editing, corilla is pretty good and has a generous free plan. It's in Beta at the moment and has a few rough edges but does everything I need it to do.

Undistraction commented Jul 27, 2018

For anyone else looking for an alternative now that Gitbook has removed Markdown editing, corilla is pretty good and has a generous free plan. It's in Beta at the moment and has a few rough edges but does everything I need it to do.

@YoungJaeChoung

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@YoungJaeChoung

YoungJaeChoung Aug 7, 2018

@Undistraction

does corilla support latex syntax...?

YoungJaeChoung commented Aug 7, 2018

@Undistraction

does corilla support latex syntax...?

@Undistraction

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@Undistraction

Undistraction Aug 7, 2018

@YoungJaeChoung I ended up ditching corilla and moving to notion.so which is exactly what I've been looking for for years. I can't recommend it enough. And it support LaTeX. It's the first thing I've used for ages which has really blown me away.

Undistraction commented Aug 7, 2018

@YoungJaeChoung I ended up ditching corilla and moving to notion.so which is exactly what I've been looking for for years. I can't recommend it enough. And it support LaTeX. It's the first thing I've used for ages which has really blown me away.

@yjchoung1

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@yjchoung1

yjchoung1 Aug 13, 2018

@Undistraction Thank you for the information about a new site. I will try it. Thanks!!! x 100

yjchoung1 commented Aug 13, 2018

@Undistraction Thank you for the information about a new site. I will try it. Thanks!!! x 100

@dskvr

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@dskvr

dskvr Aug 24, 2018

It's obvious Gitbook has gone in a different direction. They've completely nixed statically generated docs, as well as plugins and pretty much everything that made Gitbook good while also making their name "GitBook" completely irrelevant.

So shall we start an effort to fork, rename and maintain our beloved "Legacy" Gitbook?

dskvr commented Aug 24, 2018

It's obvious Gitbook has gone in a different direction. They've completely nixed statically generated docs, as well as plugins and pretty much everything that made Gitbook good while also making their name "GitBook" completely irrelevant.

So shall we start an effort to fork, rename and maintain our beloved "Legacy" Gitbook?

@balhrog

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@balhrog

balhrog Sep 4, 2018

Fork that shit

balhrog commented Sep 4, 2018

Fork that shit

@nreynis

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@nreynis

nreynis Sep 17, 2018

I agree Gitbook V2 and legacy Gitbook are two entirely different products, and most of the features that made me interested in it are gone in the new version.

nreynis commented Sep 17, 2018

I agree Gitbook V2 and legacy Gitbook are two entirely different products, and most of the features that made me interested in it are gone in the new version.

@pnicoll

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@pnicoll

pnicoll Sep 17, 2018

All I wanted was a markdown pane, or at least to be able to toggle between WYSIWYG and markdown pages. Potential use case: Developer wants their now-properly-formatted .md code back for a readme. I copy the rendered WYSIWYG from the new GitBook. What will be pasted? I asked this a LONG time ago and never got an answer.

I can live without a desktop editor, and I figure most of our clients will read the documentation online, not generating PDFs, but I cannot work in a markdown-based editor that does not display markdown code.

pnicoll commented Sep 17, 2018

All I wanted was a markdown pane, or at least to be able to toggle between WYSIWYG and markdown pages. Potential use case: Developer wants their now-properly-formatted .md code back for a readme. I copy the rendered WYSIWYG from the new GitBook. What will be pasted? I asked this a LONG time ago and never got an answer.

I can live without a desktop editor, and I figure most of our clients will read the documentation online, not generating PDFs, but I cannot work in a markdown-based editor that does not display markdown code.

@istiti

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@istiti

istiti Sep 26, 2018

@dskvr no dude you're wrong, they call that innovation, they call that you need your doc online hosted by them, they call that we are in best position to know best option we can't continue with hacky plugin while wordpress can...

istiti commented Sep 26, 2018

@dskvr no dude you're wrong, they call that innovation, they call that you need your doc online hosted by them, they call that we are in best position to know best option we can't continue with hacky plugin while wordpress can...

@nreynis

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@nreynis

nreynis Sep 27, 2018

@dskvr You know people still got to make a living. If they wan't to push their product all the way on the SaaS road that's their call. The legacy version probably wasn't generating enough paying customers to sustain the company.

nreynis commented Sep 27, 2018

@dskvr You know people still got to make a living. If they wan't to push their product all the way on the SaaS road that's their call. The legacy version probably wasn't generating enough paying customers to sustain the company.

@morinted

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@morinted

morinted Sep 30, 2018

I was looking to replace my legacy gitbook site with some custom Gatsby or React-Static site, but just now I discovered Docusaurus.

Honestly, this is what I've always wished Gitbook was. Basically, it's got all the same major features (static site generation, pretty sidebar, mobile-view, markdown content) except it's written in React and lets you write custom components and the like as part of your docs. Perfect!

Only gripe: no PDF export.

morinted commented Sep 30, 2018

I was looking to replace my legacy gitbook site with some custom Gatsby or React-Static site, but just now I discovered Docusaurus.

Honestly, this is what I've always wished Gitbook was. Basically, it's got all the same major features (static site generation, pretty sidebar, mobile-view, markdown content) except it's written in React and lets you write custom components and the like as part of your docs. Perfect!

Only gripe: no PDF export.

@maksimyurkov

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@maksimyurkov

maksimyurkov Sep 30, 2018

I tried all of the above in the topic and other gitbook replacements. As a result, I transferred my book to VuePress. Highly recommend.

maksimyurkov commented Sep 30, 2018

I tried all of the above in the topic and other gitbook replacements. As a result, I transferred my book to VuePress. Highly recommend.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment