Publish personal GitHub pages

[jiahao]

I've switched over to using mkdocs for my personal page and am really liking the output.

I'd like to request that gh-deploy be extended to support personal GitHub pages also. Unlike project pages, personal pages must have repository names <username>.github.io, and the project is published to the master branch instead of gh-pages. Everything works fine if I do it manually so I presume supporting personal pages automatically should not be too difficult.

Edit: I have a hacky Makefile that emulates gh-deploy (assumes that the markdown source is on a branch called mkdocs and deploys to master):

site:
    git checkout mkdocs
    mkdocs build
    git checkout master
    cp -R site/* .
    rm -rf site
    echo Ready to commit and push

[d0ugal]

Seems reasonable. Currently our deploy code is really simple. How can we detect if it is a personal repo vs a project repo? By looking at the structure of the remote? I'd be happy to do this, but I don't want it to be a config option, so how can we figure it out automatically?

[jiahao]

Thanks for looking into this request. As far as I understand, a GitHub user can only have one personal repo, and that repo must be named <username>.github.io. So whether a repo is personal or project should be quite straightforward to determine from the remote GitHub URL.

[peter1000]

Publish personal GitHub pages: I would vote for such an option too.

[mickeyl]

This would also support organization pages!

[d0ugal]

Ok, by looking at my personal repo, I think this is how we need to do it.

Look at the output of git config --get remote.origin.url which has the format git@github.com:d0ugal/d0ugal.github.com.git

if it is USERNAME/USERNAME.github.com.git - then we can assume it is a personal/repo pages and push to master

[d0ugal]

Or, alternatively, we could just add the branch as an arguement to the gh-deploy command so you specify master. i.e. mkdocs gh-deploy --remote-branch master

[mickeyl]

Agreed. The latter would provide more flexibility.

[d0ugal]

I also think the latter is also safer. I'm a bit scared about wiping the master branch on a repo by incorrectly guessing the URL. So lets have the user provide it. :)