Repository navigation
Revamp docs - #673
Open
leopiccionia wants to merge 8 commits into
Open
Revamp docs#673leopiccionia wants to merge 8 commits into
leopiccionia wants to merge 8 commits into
Conversation
A new deploy-site workflow builds the landing and docs on every push to master and commits the output to the gh-pages branch, preserving its history and guaranteeing .nojekyll and the CNAME (jeowp.org). This replaces docs-site.yml, which synced site/ into the repository. site/ and site-novo/ (legacy landing workspace with figma references) leave version control; the build output stays local for `npm run preview:site` and is now gitignored.
Collaborator
Author
leopiccionia
marked this pull request as draft
September 30, 2026 20:11
leopiccionia
marked this pull request as ready for review
October 1, 2026 18:56
This branch has not been deployed
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.


The site overhaul addressed two complementary diagnoses. Issue #518 identified that publishing the site by committing the generated build back into
master(a leftover from PR #512) was only an intermediate step, mixing site generation with the development flow. Issue #671 identified that the current MkDocs theme had poor branding and lagged behind modern static-site generators. We decided to tackle both together: the generation stack and the publishing architecture.On the generator, although the comparison in #671 recommended Starlight as the first option, we settled on VitePress for two practical reasons: it required a much smaller migration diff, and it lets us keep the
docs/folder hosting the Markdown sources (recent Starlight versions removed the option to customize the content folder). Familiarity, already expressed in the issue, reinforced the choice. It fully meets the three requirements we set: 100% static output for GitHub Pages, embedded local search with no external service, and branding via CSS variables and theme overrides.The open question in #518 — whether the future site should remain purely technical documentation or also present the project — was answered with a two-part architecture under a single origin: a React + Vite landing page at the root (
jeowp.org) presenting JEO, and the VitePress documentation under/docs/. This separates the editorial purposes without fragmenting the user experience.For publishing, we implemented exactly the outcome proposed in #518: a dedicated workflow (
deploy-site.yml) builds the complete site on every push tomasterand publishes it to thegh-pagesbranch — preserving history, guaranteeing.nojekyll+CNAME, with an idempotent orphan fallback. The old workflow (docs-site.yml) was removed, and the generated tree (site/) left the repository entirely (now gitignored). Builds are deterministic (content-hashed assets are stable across builds), which validates serving from CI artifacts.On the content side, pages remain flat Markdown files in
docs/anddocs/dev/, and internal links were standardized as relative.mdanchors, turning VitePress's dead-link check into a real build gate. Content migrated essentially 1:1 from MkDocs, as the comparison anticipated.