Skip to content
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

move osgi.enroute.site files into this working repo #1

Closed
GrantPax opened this issue Jan 18, 2015 · 7 comments
Closed

move osgi.enroute.site files into this working repo #1

GrantPax opened this issue Jan 18, 2015 · 7 comments
Assignees

Comments

@GrantPax
Copy link
Owner

The desire is to have the site build being handled by GitHub instead of Travis. Maybe the result will be a cloneable repo. Alternatively, maybe all we will get is enough understanding of the configuration problem to fix the original. Hard to tell from here.

@GrantPax
Copy link
Owner Author

First matter is structure. It's clear Peter wanted a _source directory. Reading the documentation, source is not configurable. I can't explain why there is a partial rendering on the site now and I'm disinclined to figure it out. With such a clear statement of the override, I am going to move the source into the top-level directory. If we want to try to figure out how to use an _source directory on a working site in the future, we can.

@GrantPax
Copy link
Owner Author

removing index.md as I can't account for it in the build Never mind. I'll have to figure out what role it plays.

@GrantPax
Copy link
Owner Author

Finding pathing problems. Using {{ site.baseurl }} is the remedy or could remove leading slashes. Things seem to work ok by just removing the leading slashes. If things go loopy on migration, we can add the variable.

Edit: No no. GitHub needs {{ site.baseurl }} for their build.

@GrantPax
Copy link
Owner Author

commenting out unused footer links until they have a purpose

@GrantPax
Copy link
Owner Author

Ok. Most pathing issues are addressed

@GrantPax
Copy link
Owner Author

Well, I think the migration is complete. Whether or not it will be used is in question. Either way.

@GrantPax
Copy link
Owner Author

Rough migration is indeed complete. Issues for the migration should be opened individually.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant