On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 5:58 AM, Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Feb 02, 2017 at 12:54:53AM -0600, Samuel Lijin wrote: > >> In theory, you could also dump the build artifacts to a GH Pages repo >> and host it from there, although I don't know if you would run up >> against any of the usage limits[0]. The immediate problem I see with >> that approach, though, is that I have no idea how any of the dynamic >> stuff (e.g. search) would be replaced. > > I've talked with Pages people and they say it shouldn't be a big deal to > host. The main issue is that it's not _just_ a static site. It's a site > that's static once built, but a lot of the content is auto-generated > from other sources (git manpages, Pro Git and its translations, etc). > > So there's work involved in moving that generation step to whatever the > new process is (it's fine if it's running "make" locally after a Git > release and pushing up the result). Yep, noticed that when I cloned the repo the other day. Still wrangling with my own setup so that I can build everything locally. I imagine it would also be possible to set up some sort of CI/CD pipeline to handle generating build artifacts automatically; so to be honest, I don't think any of the static assets would pose a significant problem. The bigger issue, in my opinion, is that there seems to be a fair amount of non-trivial back-end stuff (https://github.com/git/git-scm.com/blob/master/spec/controllers/site_controller_spec.rb, https://github.com/git/git-scm.com/blob/master/app/controllers/site_controller.rb) including an Elasticsearch layer. (The redirects would be mildly inconvenient to handle with Pages, but like the static asset generation, should be more than doable.) >> A question: there's a DB schema in there. Does the site still use a DB? > > It does use the database to hold all of the bits that aren't checked > into Git. So renderings of the manpages, the latest release git version, > etc. AFAIK, it's all things that I would be comfortable committing into > a git repository. > > -Peff In the meantime, I've also pinged a friend at Digital Ocean about their hosting options and they've expressed interest. At the very least, they seem to offer a lot more than Heroku for 230$/mo[0], and I imagine it wouldn't be impossible to reduce the hosting costs by an order of magnitude. Think it's worth looking into? [0] https://www.digitalocean.com/pricing/#droplet