Skip to content

Conversation

@AdarshRawat1
Copy link
Member

@AdarshRawat1 AdarshRawat1 commented Dec 21, 2025

Fixes

Blog files are stored under the _posts directory. Other files belong to the Chirpy theme.

Demo - https://adarshrawat1.github.io/P4-GSoC-preview/

This prototype may have a few minor issues related to relative links or file paths. I’ll raise follow-up fixes after this is merged.

Few Limitations

  • Each blog page must have the date in the file name, e.g. 2025-10-10-README.md (format: yyyy-mm-dd-<name>.md). Couldn’t find a workaround yet.
  • Titles cannot contain : unless wrapped in quotes due to YAML parsing limits. Use - instead if needed.
  • Relative asset paths (like ./assets/img.png ) do not render correctly in the Chirpy theme. Use full GitHub URLs or embed the assets directly in the Markdown.
  • The auto-generated header in README.md appears in GitHub’s preview and may not look clean. This is fine since the main goal is the blog site view.

Adds Chirpy style blog using GitHub Pages.

Signed-off-by: Adarsh Rawat <[email protected]>
@Dscano
Copy link
Collaborator

Dscano commented Dec 21, 2025

Thank you so much, @AdarshRawat1. Would it be possible to rework the folder organization?

The folder structure you proposed changes the logic we defined for the GSoC repo. Ideally, we would like to keep the current GSoC folder organization, and place the files needed for blog generation in a dedicated folder under gsoc/.

Do you have a link where we can see the blog?

@AdarshRawat1
Copy link
Member Author

AdarshRawat1 commented Dec 21, 2025

Thank you so much, @AdarshRawat1.

He he 🌻

Would it be possible to rework the folder organization?
The folder structure you proposed changes the logic we defined for the GSoC repo. Ideally, we would like to keep the current GSoC folder organization, and place the files needed for blog generation in a dedicated folder under gsoc/.

I was aware of this challenge. I tried but it was not possible with this theme, as I mentioned earlier .. @qobilidop 's Suggestion of having a layer of redirection should help.

Do you have a link where we can see the blog?

Here is the demo link - https://adarshrawat1.github.io/P4-GSoC-preview/

@AdarshRawat1 AdarshRawat1 force-pushed the Dev-Blog-site-using-Chirpy branch from d3ec9e5 to aa00223 Compare December 21, 2025 12:12
@AdarshRawat1
Copy link
Member Author

AdarshRawat1 commented Dec 21, 2025

I've retained the previous repository structure to avoid breaking GSoC project link.

Like

And for the new projects we can have redirection wiki.

@qobilidop
Copy link
Member

qobilidop commented Dec 21, 2025

@AdarshRawat1 Thanks for your work! This looks great at a glance, especially with your demo. Need a bit more time to dive into the details, but I have a high level comment on the _posts/ directory for now.

My current feeling is that no all existing docs have to become a blog post. Some of them are fine staying as simple markdowns and directly viewed in the GitHub repo.

So here's my proposal:

  1. Ultimately, let's aim to make blog posts for project reports only, not including other docs.
  2. With 1 as the goal, I suggest we have the blog posts directly under _posts/ without nested directories. Similar to https://github.com/llvm/llvm-blog-www/tree/main/content/posts.
  3. For this PR, how about having a single blog post as a demo (e.g. @AdarshRawat1 your project report)? My main consideration is that we could later ask other previous contributors to send PRs for their project reports, and this would be a good exercise for all of us to familiarize with the workflow, both making the blog post and reviewing it. But since @AdarshRawat1 you have already done all the work (I appreciate that a lot!), this might not be worthwhile. I'll leave this to you to decide.

@AdarshRawat1 @Dscano @fruffy What do you think?

@AdarshRawat1
Copy link
Member Author

AdarshRawat1 commented Dec 21, 2025

Sounds Good! we'll host only reports for now.

Adding to your list @qobilidop ...

I'll draft a page including steps to make it easier for new contributors to follow.

@Dscano
Copy link
Collaborator

Dscano commented Jan 24, 2026

@AdarshRawat1 Thank you for your latest comments. Unfortunately, I haven’t been able to take a look yet. Ideally, I’ll get back to this after February 3, as we are currently focused on finalizing the P4 Consortium submission for GSoC.

@AdarshRawat1
Copy link
Member Author

@AdarshRawat1 Thank you for your latest comments. Unfortunately, I haven’t been able to take a look yet. Ideally, I’ll get back to this after February 3, as we are currently focused on finalizing the P4 Consortium submission for GSoC.

No worries, All the best to team for submission.

@AdarshRawat1 AdarshRawat1 force-pushed the Dev-Blog-site-using-Chirpy branch from 5c9d690 to 0a581ae Compare January 30, 2026 20:32
@AdarshRawat1 AdarshRawat1 marked this pull request as draft January 30, 2026 20:59
@AdarshRawat1
Copy link
Member Author

AdarshRawat1 commented Jan 31, 2026

I’ll switch to using GitHub Raw Links for all images and diagrams. This is the only way to make sure they show up correctly on both the GitHub preview and the live blog without breaking.
Note: You have to upload/push the image to the repo first, then grab the "Raw" link to paste into your Markdown. I’ve added these steps to the Wiki.

Waiting for your inputs then we can do this in a seperate PR to avoid mess.

@AdarshRawat1 AdarshRawat1 force-pushed the Dev-Blog-site-using-Chirpy branch from 836b99f to da10a84 Compare January 31, 2026 09:27
@AdarshRawat1 AdarshRawat1 marked this pull request as ready for review January 31, 2026 09:59
@AdarshRawat1 AdarshRawat1 requested review from Dscano and fruffy January 31, 2026 09:59
@AdarshRawat1
Copy link
Member Author

Blog folder contains files related to chirpy theme only.

@AdarshRawat1 AdarshRawat1 force-pushed the Dev-Blog-site-using-Chirpy branch from d6090cd to eaf1950 Compare January 31, 2026 10:10
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants