Move to netlify

[caniszczyk]

No description provided.

[lucperkins]

@caniszczyk I got it running on Netlify with no configuration changes: https://rook-io.netlify.com.

What's required at this point:

• Transfer of DNS control to Netlify
• Renaming of website repo (to disable GitHub Pages build)
• Enabling of Netlify access to repo by Rook admins

[caniszczyk]

1. can you work with LF IT to get the NS records updated

dns1.p03.nsone.net
dns2.p03.nsone.net
dns3.p03.nsone.net
dns4.p03.nsone.net

2. we need @rook/owners to do that

3. already added @jbw976 @travisn

[bassam]

Does Netlify enable full DNS management? We need A records for Jenkins and others. /cc @Defilan

[caniszczyk]

@bassam yes

[caniszczyk]

https://app.netlify.com/teams/rook/dns/setup/rook.io/nameservers

LF IT just needs to update the ns records and the rook maintainers will manage DNS moving forward

[Defilan]

Hey @caniszczyk , this sounds great. Thanks for doing this. Rook's current DNS management is through AWS and we are actually in the middle of migrating that to another AWS account, so the timing is perfect. I'm all for the movement to netlify.

As @bassam mentioned, we have records for our Jenkins environment, as well as a handful of other things (slack, etc). Correct me if I'm wrong, but it looks like we will have full "self-service" use, right? As we are also in the middle of migrating Jenkins instances and I'd like to be able to quickly switch the records to the new servers when we do our scheduled migration. How does this sound @travisn ?

[caniszczyk]

yes it would be self service via Netlify

…

On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 11:13 AM Christopher Maher ***@***.***> wrote: Hey @caniszczyk <https://github.com/caniszczyk> , this sounds great. Thanks for doing this. Rook's current DNS management is through AWS and we are actually in the middle of migrating that to another AWS account, so the timing is perfect. I'm all for the movement to netlify. As @bassam <https://github.com/bassam> mentioned, we have records for our Jenkins environment, as well as a handful of other things (slack, etc). Correct me if I'm wrong, but it looks like we will have full "self-service" use, right? As we are also in the middle of migrated Jenkins instances and I'd like to be able to quickly switch the records to the new servers when we do our scheduled migration. How does this sound @travisn <https://github.com/travisn> ? — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#60?email_source=notifications&email_token=AAAPSII7YNYJHDDOO24ZDHTPZ7FKHA5CNFSM4HWYG262YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGODXNVN3A#issuecomment-500913900>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAAPSIKSBHG5QVLMBKRBJDDPZ7FKHANCNFSM4HWYG26Q> .

-- Cheers, Chris Aniszczyk http://aniszczyk.org +1 512 961 6719

[Defilan]

Awesome, thanks @caniszczyk .

[Defilan]

The migration is now complete. @travisn do you mind closing the issue out? Thanks!

[travisn]

Done!

[rathpc]

@caniszczyk I got it running on Netlify with no configuration changes: https://rook-io.netlify.com.

What's required at this point:

* Transfer of DNS control to Netlify

* Renaming of website repo (to disable GitHub Pages build)

* Enabling of Netlify access to repo by Rook admins

@travisn, @jbw976

with regards to the second bullet:

Renaming of website repo (to disable GitHub Pages build)

Is this still needed as an action item?

[lucperkins]

@rathpc The current status of things:

• The site is being successfully built from my fork but not yet from this repo (I don't have the appropriate permissions).
• DNS control has been transferred over to Netlify
• As for renaming the repo, I learned that it's not necessary to do that to disable GitHub Pages. However, I feel like the existence of the repo of this name would incline people to think that the site would be available at rook.github.io. I would recommend renaming.

[rathpc]

@lucperkins

Thank you for the clarification. Since this issue has been closed for quite some time would you mind creating issues for each of the action items you believe should still be addressed?

[arturrez]

@lucperkins, can you please verify dns control? I still see ns1 dns servers authoritative for rook.io zone https://mxtoolbox.com/SuperTool.aspx?action=dns%3arook.io&run=networktools

[jbw976]

I opened a CNCF service desk ticket to get Rook maintainer access to NS1 to manage the DNS records for rook.io there.

[caniszczyk]

I'm pretty sure it's under control via Netlify: https://app.netlify.com/teams/rook/dns/rook.io

[jbw976]

Thanks for that pointer @caniszczyk, we were able to update the DNS records a bit and Amazon's cert manager (ACM) was able to renew the certificate for rook.io. We are good on that front.

In terms of @lucperkins other efforts around moving the entire rook.io site over to Netlify, can someone give me a quick refresher on the root reason for why that was needed?

We can help take the additional steps needed to make the transition.
Are the changes in @lucperkins fork something that can simply be opened as a PR to this repo? Or does some other config outside of this repo need to be changed.

[lucperkins]

@jbw976 I interpreted this issue, along with #67 and the text of the README, as calling for moving the site build/publish process to Netlify, in addition to the already-transferred DNS management. This is of course 100% up to the project maintainers. The core benefits of a transition, from my perspective:

1. Access to Netlify's deploy preview feature for PRs, which is something that GitHub Pages does not provide (and is also listed as a potential future improvement in the README).
2. Freedom to use any tools you want. GitHub Pages not only restricts you to Jekyll (which has a good ecosystem but is quite slow) but also limits the gems and plugins that can be used with Jekyll. Netlify has no such restrictions plus built-in support for a wide variety of static site generators and runtimes.

My fork is identical to this repo; its purpose is solely to show that migrating to Netlify wouldn't require any code changes. So no PR would be necessary, and switching over would require flipping a few switches.

[lucperkins]

@jbw976 Any thoughts on this?

[jbw976]

Thank you for both your explanation and your patience @lucperkins! That deploy preview feature for PRs actually does look pretty useful and can help us test for regressions as part of each PR. I definitely like that.

Another thing that I like about GitHub Pages is the automated security vulnerability alerts and PRs to fix them too. Does Netlify also have similar functionality? I couldn't find it from a quick search and reading pages such as https://www.netlify.com/security/.

I really appreciate your efforts at helping us make the right move for the static rook.io site. If we decide to go ahead and make the transition fully to netlify (which seems like we should, as long as the security update story is OK), then I'll be happy to help with access or config updates that are needed. Thanks a lot @lucperkins! 🙇

[lucperkins]

@jbw976 As far as I know, those checks are performed regardless of whether you use GitHub Pages, though I could be wrong (my searches have been inconclusive thus far).