Skip to content

restore instructions for running with global Jekyll #375

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

Merged

Conversation

SethTisue
Copy link
Member

at @heathermiller's request

@heathermiller
Copy link
Member

Can you reverse the order of the instructions? Global first, and then bundler? Essentially everyone who is currently building the site is using global Jekyll, so it makes sense to list that first to avoid confusion for people who have already adopted this workflow

@dwijnand
Copy link
Member

Personally I think we should promote and encourage not installing things globally, and using the versioned Gemfile, etc.

Still restore the instructions, but in the order they are presented here currently.

@SethTisue SethTisue force-pushed the restore-global-jekyll-instructions branch from ae37bf4 to 4ffc8fd Compare December 17, 2015 15:18
@SethTisue
Copy link
Member Author

I agree with Dale. If there are a few people who still want to do it the old way, fine. The Bundler way is the correct direction to steer new contributors.

@SethTisue
Copy link
Member Author

Essentially everyone who is currently building the site

I'm nobody?

@heathermiller
Copy link
Member

I disagree with both of you. 63 out of 65 (or whatever) contributors who have contributed to the site already have Jekyll installed. They reach for the README to remember "jekyll serve".

They do not want the distraction of figuring out what bundler is etc.

Further, I work in an office where people come into my office regularly to complain about having to use something other than Scala/sbt to build websites. Using Jekyll system-wide is how we do it across all projects here. Confusing several people and forcing them to change their workflow when there's no measurable benefit for them is unnecessary.

I'm not willing to receive the heat from my co-workers for your personal preference of not wanting to install Jekyll system-wide. It makes my daily working life harder.

You have gemfile.lock etc now, you have enabled folks the option of using bundler. Please leave the instructions and the build as they were for the people who were working on the site before you arrived.

@SethTisue
Copy link
Member Author

for your personal preference of not wanting to install Jekyll system-wide

please understand and grant that my personal preferences are not what is driving this.

@SethTisue
Copy link
Member Author

I have pushed an additional commit that restores the original order.

@dwijnand
Copy link
Member

I don't think it was the intent to force anything upon your colleagues.

I also think that if anyone were to change there would be a benefit for them (much like there is for python, etc).

Sounds like you work with a bunch of regularly complaining, easily confused bunch of colleagues.. :(

@heathermiller
Copy link
Member

please understand and grant that my personal preferences are not what is driving this.

I can agree that the concept of allowing people to non-globally install and run with the same environment as on the production server is a good idea.

What I can't agree with is the idea of forcing this upon people who don't need it forced upon them. If their workflow is working fine, let them be. When they start having build problems, let them discover the wonders of bundler.

@heathermiller
Copy link
Member

Thanks :)

heathermiller added a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 17, 2015
…ions

restore instructions for running with global Jekyll
@heathermiller heathermiller merged commit dabff78 into scala:master Dec 17, 2015
@SethTisue SethTisue deleted the restore-global-jekyll-instructions branch December 17, 2015 16:28
@SethTisue
Copy link
Member Author

LGTM — I'm fine w/ how this ended up.

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants