<div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr">On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 9:17 PM Dave Cooper <<a href="mailto:david.cooper@genworks.com">david.cooper@genworks.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div></div><div>From what I understand, the proposed deployment mechanism just means that we will have to push static site content to a git repository, then a pipeline will automatically put the files in the right place for serving. This is instead of another option which would be using ftp/scp/rsync to put the files to the correct location directly. </div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>That's correct.<br></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div></div><div>So we're depending on git, as well as the automatic deployment pipeline which is set up through gitlab. </div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>That's correct too.<br></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div></div><div>From the user's perspective, if gitlab falls out of fashion next year, there will be some other mechanism for doing the pipeline, and the pushing to git will remain the same (i.e. the user wouldn't see any difference). </div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Absolutely.<br></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div></div><div>If, in two years, git falls out of fashion, then the user will push their static files similarly using some other revision system other than git (likely with a similar workflow), so again it should not result in much disruption. </div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>That's what I'd say, yes.<br></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div></div><div>Question: will there be an opportunity in the pipeline to call e.g. "sbcl" in order to process the files, similar to what we are doing with <a href="http://c-l.net" target="_blank">c-l.net</a> itself?</div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Yes. You can definitely do more than just move your files into place: Just last night, I've built all of Quickref with our pipeline and had GitLab put it in the deployment location (for my testing purposes): <a href="http://new-quickref.common-lisp.net/">http://new-quickref.common-lisp.net/</a></div><div><br></div><div>If you favorite content generator, Lisp or Golang tool isn't readily available, we can support installing those, or you can simply depend on the Docker images for your favorate tool (which GitLab will automatically grab for you).<br></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div> Or will the pipeline be limited just to moving already-prepared static files into the correct location? </div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>No. Absolutely not. The purpose is to help people with consistent deployment environments and for those who already worked with Git, to simplify deployment by offloading the deployment process to GitLab (which removes the need to build a site and then install it through scp or ssh after that, because GitLab takes care of both steps).</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>Regards,</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>Erik.<br></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr">On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 3:48 PM Erik Huelsmann <<a href="mailto:ehuelsmann@common-lisp.net" target="_blank">ehuelsmann@common-lisp.net</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_quote"><div><br></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"> It is a nice option, but I do not think it should be the only option.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>That's clear. Thanks a bunch for the feedback! I'll check what I can do to allow multiple deployment methods to co-exist.</div></div></div></blockquote></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div>-- <br><div dir="ltr" class="gmail-m_464079004725712983gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div>My Best,<br><br>Dave Cooper, david.cooper@gen.works<br><a href="http://genworks.com" target="_blank">genworks.com</a>, <a href="http://gendl.org" target="_blank">gendl.org</a><br>+1 248-330-2979<br></div><div><br></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div>
</blockquote></div></div></div>