This makes the project useful without dynamic search backend. I didn't have time to polish all commits yet to push it before weekend.
Browsable on https://abitrolly.github.io/fedora-packages-static/
Looks good! A few changes would be appreciated:
The latest code of https://abitrolly.github.io/fedora-packages-static/ is on https://github.com/abitrolly/fedora-packages-static and I can't remove GitHub files, because I use them for publishing what you see. Pagure doesn't provide any alternative to keep these pages available.
Could you move the static index to a link under the main index?
Can you post a screen of what do you mean?
Remove dependencies.txt, requirements should be in the readme. Please fix your commit history
Before I invest more of my free time into this, it would be nice to see the decision if the dynamic parts of the repo are going by removed now that there is true usable static version, or if the repo will be renamed to reflect that the search doesn't work.
As you see on https://abitrolly.github.io/fedora-packages-static/ the search form is gone.
That's downstream for us - you're free to have them on your side, but github-specific configuration has nothing to do here.
Add a link next to Back to the application index ↵ on the front page (the one with a search field).
Back to the application index ↵
We can add a flag to hide the dynamic search field if you want to use this project in a purely static way, but we won't drop the search feature (= we implemented it for a reason).
Why not rename this repo to just fedora-packages-3? Which reincarnation is it, BTW?
fedora-packages-3
This repository name and URL have been used in various places over the last months, and I'm completly fine with this name anway. From my point of view changing it will just be painful for various people.
As for the history: the original app was killed along the recent datacenter move. I started to work on this project a few weeks after said move and Bredan took over my POC (many thanks to him). There's also another dynamic POC out there, but It does not seem it'll be used. More on the infra list archives.
rebased onto a96d1a776c765ee4bf8bdd97a23de729da189dcb
I removed GitHub actions from the history.
Do you want the link to https://abitrolly.github.io/fedora-packages-static/ or how do you want it to look like?
Having it link to the former looks good, but you need to change the CSS to be in line with the current changes so that it looks fine on smaller devices (i.e. use .container instead of .page and restrict the width using other bootstrap classes/breakpoints). Instead of hiding or showing the search bar in response to SEARCH_BACKEND, you could just use the package index page over the search page as the website's index depending on the value because of this change.
.container
.page
SEARCH_BACKEND
"Static Index" should probably be black due to being the primary header for the page.
The logo image should link to the website's index page
Packages Starting with cu - Fedora Packages
There are some merge conflicts, so you will need to fix that.
rebased onto e64d902481a6ee933cf101fc4fc6e28d30e08ea3
1 new commit added
Fix for new style changes
Resolved merge conflicts and made title black again.
I am not skilled in design / CSS / bootstrap enough to know what needs to be done there. Just copied index markup changes to my own template.
What is left.
Make primary header black again
Link logo to website root from index pages
Add `layout.html.j2` and use it for static indexes
Generate static index on a separate page
This should be fine with dynamic backend enabled. It makes static index a separate page.
rebased onto 90c1263d59989363ce47468adbc288d4b1a44d27
Going to test and merge this today. Due to the planned changes with how source packages are handled (see mailing list for context, changing url scheme to /pkgs/<source pkg>/<subpackage>), we will need to decide how to represent them in this index. I.e. do we list:
/pkgs/<source pkg>/<subpackage>
I think it can be kept as two for the time being. Thoughts?
Pull-Request has been merged by mymindstorm
To check if some software is packaged for Fedora, I'd leave only binary packages. Although the "source package" concept is historically important, it could be just a link to "packaging sources". I believe such naming doesn't require learning new concept, or unlearning that "Fedora package" is not a final term.
This makes the project useful without dynamic search backend. I didn't have time to polish all commits yet to push it before weekend.
Browsable on https://abitrolly.github.io/fedora-packages-static/