On 04/07/17 15:09, Catonano wrote: > > > 2017-07-04 22:00 GMT+02:00 sirgazil >: > > Hey :) > > > > On 01/07/17 09:26, Ludovic Courtès wrote: > > Hi sirgazil, > > Slowly trying to catch up… > > sirgazil > skribis: > > This implementation is missing the following parts: > > 1. New screenshots > 2. Packages pages > 1. Package detail page > 2. Packages issues page > 3. Packages reproducibility page > 4. Packages JSON file > > To complete part (1) someone could provide the screenshots > (ideally > 1920×1080 px) in JPG and add them to the > "static/media/img" directory, > and update the list of screenshots in "apps/base/data.scm". > > Since “someone” has not shown up yet ;-), maybe we can delay > (1), no? > > To complete (2), there are some package related procedures > missing > (https://bitbucket.org/sirgazil/guixsd-website/issues?status=new&status=open > ). > I tried to use the code that is already in the current > website, but > couldn't figure things out. > > To complete part (2.1), there is an issue to solve: > package pages go in > paths like "/packages/blender-3.0/", but running "haunt > build" with > pages on paths that include "." will render the pages with > all the HTML > content inside a pre element. David, the maintainer of > Haunt, does not > know yet why this would happen. If this issue is solved, > there are > already helper builders in "apps/packages/builders.scm" to > generate all > the pages. > > Was this issue fixed in the meantime? David? > > So, for now, the packages pages are working as in the > current website, > but not using tables (to make it easier to adapt the page > to several > screen widths), and packages are distributed in numbered > pages to avoid > big HTML pages that take too long to load. > > Also, the JavaScript code that gets package build status > is not > integrated (couldn't figure this one out either). > > Did you have a chance to look at whether you could include the > existing > code? After all, the code is already there so we should be > able to just > “move” it to its new home without further ado. > > If that’s more complicated that this, then maybe we can ask > for help > from Alex Sassmannshausen, or simply delay it. > > To complete (2.2), (2.3), and (2.4) someone could add > helper builders to > the packages app, and recycle the related SXML pages > already used in the > current website. > > Likewise, can’t we just reuse the existing code? I haven’t looked > closely but I imagine we won’t have to rewrite all of these from > scratch. > > How can we proceed? I wouldn’t want to let the fancy web site > bitrot! > I’m a bit swamped though so it would be more productive if you > could > directly hack on it on the repo, but I think you were > unwilling to do > this? Thoughts? :-) > > > I was going to take a look again, and see what I could do to > complete the thing, but during the application setup of guix > 0.13.0 many things were being built and the computer turned off > three times. It seems it can't take that job (I didn't have this > problem with 0.12.0, though). > > So I don't know what to do > > > computers need manteinance > > This could be a sign that your computer needs a refreshing of its > thermal grease and a cleaning of its grates. > > Usually when you do that, it becomes an almost new machine and can > compile lots of stuff. That's my experience, by the way. I'll see if I can do something about it. > Another thing you could do is wait for a better building servers park > to be available for Guix > > Rekado has mentioned that an improvement is in the pipe, to be > delivered soonish > > With that you could find way more binaries ready for use and you won't > need your own computer to compile them > > Ludo is way more competent and informed than I am, though, so he might > have some better suggestion. Thanks, Catonano :) -- https://sirgazil.bitbucket.io/