-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 111
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
Remove ecosystem stuff and port to scientific-python-hugo-theme #413
Conversation
We can go over the details but thanks for this folks! |
Wooo thanks, this looks great! Not sure how we should go about this. Maybe we should already strip it down to the bare minimum (removing FAQ, gallery etc. which are currently for NumPy or SciPy ecosystem). Then we can decide in other PRs about what to add. If we want to keep this already, then I can take some time to help go over all files. |
13aa0c3
to
444a401
Compare
I force-pushed the newsite branch from 13aa0c3 to 444a401. The only change I made was to use the official logo. Originally, I found the logo via a web search on some random site. @rgommers provided a link to the official logo (see https://github.com/scientific-python/scipy.org-new/issues/12). Here are the favicons with a dark and light theme: The official logo has a transparent snake now (before it was white). I don't have a strong opinion, but I think the transparent snake makes the favicon hard to see with the dark theme. That is fine with me, I just wanted to point it out. |
Personally I prefer the white snake. It's more readable. The favicon would also look better. Maybe we can add some white in the official logo? |
I'd fill that snake with white, at least for the favicon. Maybe we should consider for the footer logo as well. |
Yes also the GitHub icon could be white IMO. But we could see all these later. This is already so much better than what we actually have 😅 |
I think it's just a problem with the official logo SVG file. It should always be white. We should redesign the logo at some point anyway, or at least have a graphic designer clean it up. For now let's just do what looks best. |
@stefanv did some minor clean up of the logo: scipy/archive#2 I will update the logo here after that has been reviewed. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I went through all the files, not much to adjust 👍
Makefile
Outdated
hugo $(BASEURLARG) | ||
touch public/.nojekyll | ||
|
||
public/.nojekyll: html |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Is this a leftover, or you plan on adding something else?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@rgommers, @ilayn, @tupui I updated the Makefile in 09f2da9. I am not certain that it is correct, so it would be good if you could carefully review it. Also, I have some questions:
Deployments
- Do we still want to deploy to the Enthought servers? Or should we use netlify or gh-pages?
Redirects
- Do we still want to do all the redirects from the old Moin site?
- Since this moves everything up a level, do we want to add redirects from scipy.org/scipylib/* to scipy.org/* now?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'd say yes to redirects from scipylib/*
and let's get rid of the Moin redirects - those are a decade old by now and shouldn't get many hits anymore.
Do we still want to deploy to the Enthought servers? Or should we use netlify or gh-pages?
Let's do it properly and deploy to netlify/cloudflare/gh-pages. I think GitHub Pages is the most practical for deployment, and Netlify for preview.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Of those, I think only Netlify supports easy redirects.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ah yes, forgot about that. We should probably go with the non-free version then, so we can give anyone who wants to help maintain it access.
Co-authored-by: Pamphile ROY <roy.pamphile@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Pamphile ROY <roy.pamphile@gmail.com>
a00bf11
to
da2ab03
Compare
If this is going in soon, as pointed in scipy/scipy#14267, maybe we should redirect to the dev doc for now. |
I'd be inclined to merge it soon, and then we can iterate on it more quickly. Can you send a message to the mailing list about it @jarrodmillman? I don't expect much there beside a bunch of thank you's, but it's a change we should run by the list. |
a451733
to
de29232
Compare
✔️ Deploy Preview for loving-hopper-c72a13 ready! 🔨 Explore the source changes: 56201aa 🔍 Inspect the deploy log: https://app.netlify.com/sites/loving-hopper-c72a13/deploys/617105781806ce0007a5d3a1 😎 Browse the preview: https://deploy-preview-413--loving-hopper-c72a13.netlify.app/donations |
de29232
to
161d9d8
Compare
There are two minor things I want to take care of before this is ready to merge. I will update this PR by the end of the day. |
We should keep a link to the SciPy conference website - perhaps in the footer? |
@rgommers @tupui @ilayn I believe this is "ready" to merge. I created issue #418 to track what we need to do to deploy the new site after this is merged. @stefanv and I will take care of the DNS stuff. We will set up draft.scipy.org once you merge this PR. And we will wait to update scipy.org until a decision is made on #418. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'll just give others to have a one final look and then we can click the button, once again thanks a lot for the effort folks!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM as well, thanks a ton!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Went through all the pages, content seems fine, all links seem to work, and it looks great. In it goes!
Closes #357, closes #99, closes #117, closes #382. This is a big change, but it is fairly straightforward. It does two main things.
Replaces the scipy sphinx theme with the numpy.org hugo theme. Since we plan to use the numpy.org theme for multiple sites, we created https://github.com/scientific-python/scientific-python-hugo-theme. I will create a PR to numpy/numpy.org to switch them to scientific-python-hugo-theme. @stefanv and I will maintain scientific-python-hugo-theme and will implement whatever numpy.org and scipy.org want. (numpy.org has a web team that we need to talk to about the theme stuff, but we plan to follow their lead and intend to provide any help they need/want.)
Removes the ecosystem stuff. Essentially, I replaced https://scipy.org with https://scipy.org/scipylib and removed
scipy.org/scipylib
. Since I moved to a new theme this involved moving the files and changing them fromrst
tomd
files. I used pandoc and manually reviewed the results. This change broke the tables. To make things easier to edit, we implemented a table syntax that you can see in, for example,content/en/download.md
.@stefanv and I are more than happy to help maintain this site for the next few years as part of our work on the https://scientific-python.org project. I suspect it would be worth updating the text on the site. But I think it makes more sense to merge this and then to make additional changes. I would be happy to help coordinate this, implement things that the group wants, and review other PRs.