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.
So we're depending on git, as well as the automatic deployment pipeline which is set up through gitlab.
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).
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.
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 c-l.net itself? Or will the pipeline be limited just to moving already-prepared static files into the correct location?
On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 3:48 PM Erik Huelsmann ehuelsmann@common-lisp.net wrote:
It is a nice option, but I do not think it should be the only option.
That's clear. Thanks a bunch for the feedback! I'll check what I can do to allow multiple deployment methods to co-exist.