Yay! I can now build my static sites using the based CI system and push them live on Codeberg pages fully automated!

@jwildeboer Jekyll was made to be built locally. NOT on the SERVER! LOCALLY! Guys, build your Jekyll websites locally check, locally, if everything is ok, and then git push the website.

@dani It's 2022 ;) Using a CI pipeline is quite accepted in the Jekyll world. It's also how GitHub and GitLab run their static pages offering. I happily do both. Local build and git push or CI based.

@jwildeboer I also do local build and my GitLab page uses the simple HTML website CI. Which is a waste on GitLab's front. And I have to *wait longer* to see if the online changes have been updated. I consider CI a waste in my opinion. It may only be useful for git in big companies, not on websites. I consider Jekyll and Hugo and similars to not ever need CI. Just makes things more complicated for 2022 ;-)

Follow

@dani As long as you are the only person updating the content, that works (and I also use it for a few sites). But when you have a bigger team that edits pages, the CI way makes things easier. Now I don't have to setup a full Jekyll system for every team member. I am happy that both things exist and work.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
social.wildeboer.net

Mastodon instance for people with Wildeboer as their last name