CodeKit2
CodeKit2 copied to clipboard
bdkjones
Jekyll support?
I've been meaning to put some time into investigating what's up with Codekit and Jekyll. I just haven't had a chance. So I'm opening this super-lame "issue" to say, uh, hi. I'm using Jekyll, setup in a classic Jekylly way. And Codekit isn't able to do it's magic previewing what I'm working on because it's trying to load the original file, not the compiled file.
So: a) am I just missing something? Where it already works if I just configure it right. b) if not ^, then do you have plans to support Jekyll... do you know what I mean? Should I write up what's needed?
Oh — also.... THIS CODEKIT 2 IS COMPLETELY FREAKING AWESOME. I've resisted using any tool that auto refreshes the browser page when I save an HTML or CSS file... but now I'm addicted. Codekit has convinced me this is better. And I love that you've built these new features into the tool I was already using everyday.... Thanks for doing such great work.
Thanks for mentioning this, Jen. I share your sentiments. CodeKit is such a nice package that does everything for me but is still very fast and hassle-free. And elegant at that. I am also very grateful for that. Thank you, Bryan.
Hey Jen,
First, thanks for the compliments! Second, I don't use Jekyll myself so I'm unfamiliar with it. I have heard of it, though, and I'm certainly willing to support workflows that use it. To do that I would need you to write up a walkthrough of exactly how it works and how you're configuring everything. Then I'd need a small demo project (as simple as you can make it) that I can use to test with.
If you're willing to put that together, I'll make CodeKit work with Jekyll. (Probably not for the initial release of 2.0, since it's right around the corner, but I will put it at the top of my list for 2.1, which will be coming out quickly after I ship 2.0)
And really, thanks for the kind words. I've been super dejected lately because there's been so many issues with the beta (which makes me think I should never touch a code editor ever again) and virtually no one has said anything about 2.0 being good... it's just been all bugs and issues. I'm very worried that I'm about to ship something that no one will like, so it's nice to hear at least one person excited about it.
Dude, CK2 is unbelievable! I firmly believe that having all those features at your fingertips will completely change the way folks develop websites. Right now I think I use about 4.2% of what CK2 can do and can't wait to try out all the other goodies. Keep it up - you're so close.
The Swiss Army Knife of web development just got even more awesome. People are going to go and buy Macs just because of CodeKit, again.
I must admit I am one of those guys that only commented on bug reports but don't worry Bryan CK2 is AWESOME! You've done a very good job and I bet most of the people in beta (if not all) are thinking the same ;)
I've been trying to find something to report about the app ever since I got into the beta, but for my current workflow, it's been pretty smooth. It's an amazing piece of work. I might have to put up an issue complaining that I can't even use Grunt anymore.
I have to chime in here: stop worrying 'cause CodeKit 2 is FANTASTIC! For me, the super fast Sass compiling via Libsass is worth the price of admission alone. Thank you for all your hard work making our work way more pleasant!
@bdkjones Don't worry—it's fantastic. CodeKit 1 and especially 2 have made front-end development so much easier. And great UI. Your app is literally one of the main reasons I can't move to GNU/Linux. Thanks for all the work, and keep it up.
Yay! There's now a lovefest issue at https://github.com/bdkjones/codekit2beta/issues/236 now. It's impossible to show too much love, so pile it on over there.
Meanwhile... Jekyll!
@bdkjones I'll make you a screencast next week showing you how I set up a jekyll project, what ruby command is used to compile the project (jekyll serve --watch), and what the deal is that I was talking about before — how the CodeKit preview opens the wrong html file (it's as if a .scss file were being used instead of the css file that Sass compiles).
A screencast is the fastest way to explain. But I won't have time until early next week to make one.
I'm glad to hear you are up for it. Especially with GitHub Pages using Jekyll, it has gotten a lot of momentum.
Thanks!
I finally made a video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yem5oGBtOJU
I hope that helps. I'll make a test project next.
Ok, here's a super basic jekyll project. Like I said in the video, many people use more complex setups... but this repo is the basic minimum.
https://github.com/jensimmons/jekyll-demo
(I just ran "jekyll new" to let jekyll itself setup the basic recommended project structure, and then ran "jekyll build" to build the _site dir).
UPDATE: Interesting — even though I didn't put a gitignore file in the repo to exclude _site, GitHub did. So I guess it's impossible to use GitHub to host a jekyll repo and have the _site dir in the repo. You'll need to run jekyll on your end to make that happen.
To summarize: I think what's needed to support Jekyll is 2 things:
- run the jekyll ruby gem to do all the jekylly things —aka, get "jekyll build --watch" running in the background.
- get CodeKit's server to understand to run what's inside _site and ignore everything outside of _site — without requiring an external server.
I don't think there's a third part needed, but perhaps someone else has more to say about it...
Wow, tired Jen is TIRED in that video. Sorry to slowly ramble my way around. It was a long day yesterday. Hope I hit on the info you needed anyway.
@jensimmons This is cool to see. I'm a jekyll fan and user. I was using the beta for Codekit 2 on my jekyll powered & github hosted pages.
I set the Codekit's server port as :9000 (which is where my jekyll -serve was running). Then, I made codekit ignore _site, and a few other folders, as otherwise, every time you save a page, it refreshed the whole project. + I also had Codekit compiling my SASS to style.min.css and my Jekyll project was referencing that directly, so then every time I made a style change, jekyll -serve would then add the new recompiled css file to the _site folder and with the auto refresh, it all just worked.
This was my workflow, and it worked well. Is this what you had in mind, or was it something else?
Plus it will get interesting as Jekyll will soon be able to compile SASS for you on build? :-/
That's a great workaround, @Chrisedmo. There are other ways to do it too, and I'm sure I'll do something like that if I need to work on a Jekyll site before CodeKit 2.1+ comes out.... but I wasn't just looking for a solution for me.
What do I have in mind? A Jekyll logo on https://incident57.com/codekit. The words "Jekyll support" somewhere in the feature list. And this result: when a CodeKit user drags a Jekyll project into CodeKit, the software automatically understands what's going on, handles the directory structure without any workarounds, automatically complies Jekyll for you, so you don't have to run "jekyll build --watch" or "jekyll serve --watch" from a command line. And loads the correct pages into the browsers when you use CodeKit's preview feature. All without special configuration.
Why do I want that? Because it'll help CodeKit get more customers. And make it even easier to teach newbies how to use Jekyll. And I like those kinds of things — super simple fullproof tools.
Chris, maybe you can help test once this gets going, or explain the Jekylliness that I've missed. It sounds like once "jekyll build" also runs Sass, CodeKit will want to prevent it from running twice unnecessarily. I couldn't really explain in my video the difference between "jekyll build" and "jekyll serve". Why does a person use one instead of the other?
@jensimmons That sounds like a fantastic idea. Admittedly my way is a more 'advanced' workflow to get jekyll to play nicely. I like the idea of a user being able to drag a Jekyll project into codekit and like you say, it's all ready to go!
I would love to help out, Im using Jekyll more and more, and it also seems to be going from strength to strength especially with github pages support, and I love codekit – so it's a win win for me.
In regards to your last question, as I understand, you use jekyll serve to work on your site - so it's more like a development mode. Then once you are ready, you run 'Jekyll build'. So to me it seems like Jekyll + codekit need to ideally run in the 'serve' mode. Then once you are happy - you would run 'build' somehow via Codekit and you have your compiled site all ready to go in '_site' - or if you are hosting your site with github pages, you would not need to run build, you can just commit your jekyll folder and github will publish it for you.
So if Codekit was to do this, it needs to automatically ignore the '_site' folder. Otherwise you end up with refreshing/compiling loops, as if you save something, then codekit compiles to '_site' it will also then notice a file has changed there, and then triggers another compile…? That it why I set that folder to ignore.
wow jekyll support will be awesome, I also used jekyll for some projects I change to grunt when ck1 stop working for me but now it looks more solid so I could give a try
awesome work !
I would be super happy to see Jekyll in CK 2 and since Jekyll 2 is out now is the perfect time!
Agree with everyone.
Would be great if, when adding a new project, I could check whether the project will be using "Compass", "Zurb", "Jekyll", or all of them together. Then, like what you're currently doing with Compass and Zurb, Codekit would load all dependencies to make Jekyll work right out of the box. Additionally, you could have a Jekyll specific menu with options to immediately load the local Jekyll server and automatically watch for code changes as soon as Codekit starts up.
I agree.
Codekit 1 was great, Codekit 2 is awesome, having the possibility to use Jekyll with a simple drag and drop UI would be ACE!
Recently started using Jekyll and I am using a workaround at the moment but if CodeKit were to support Jekyll projects I would be very happy indeed!
Another vote for Jekyll support!
BTW, besides GitHub Pages for static site hosting, I recently came across http://brace.io/ -- looks great.
I ended up using Hugo -- http://hugo.spf13.com/ -- instead of Jekyll for my websites, mainly because of its amazing speed (it's written in Go) and (at least for my use cases) greater flexibility.
So, not just support for Jekyll, but generic support for static site generators (i.e., tools that build to a certain directory) would be ideal.
I already use Jekyll but man this would be awesome to add on top of it
@bdkjones I really enjoy using codekit 1 & 2! What I would like to know, IF Jekyll is on your roadmap. And if yes... Could you give us a hint or estimation when you plan to "embed" Jekyll it in codekit?
Yep. It’s on the roadmap.
In order to do it right, however, I have to overhaul a big component of CodeKit’s output path algorithms. I keep putting that off but I do want to get to it.
On 5 Nov 2014, at 01:07, Duncan de Jong [email protected] wrote:
@bdkjones https://github.com/bdkjones I really enjoy using codekit 1 & 2! What I would like to know, IF Jekyll is on your roadmap. And if yes... Could you give us a hint or estimation when you plan to "embed" Jekyll it in codekit?
— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/bdkjones/CodeKit/issues/232#issuecomment-61778189.
+1 for having patience and wanting Jekyll integration. Or, maybe +.9 for Jekyll and +.1 for patience.
Ok, let's be serious, I was being generous on the patience.
Hey, I'm not a current CodeKit user (I used 1.0 a bit), but being a UI designer who is spending more and more time in the command line, I am certainly interested in getting it!
Jekyll support is a big one for me, and researching brought me to this thread, so +1
First +1 for Jekyll in 2015! I use Codekit everyday and being able to it for Jekyll be absolutely invaluable. Counting the days till it happens.
+1 Is this still something that is being considered? That would be amazing!
Lots of +1's here. Has there been any progress or news on this request?
Agreed: Great question! I would love to start using this for my projects.
On Jun 26, 2015, at 5:02 PM, Alistair Calder [email protected] wrote:
Lots of +1's here. Has there been any progress or news on this request?
— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.
This would be nice BUT we worked with Jekyll and it doesn’t have a good i18n support. So we switched to https://middlemanapp.com/ it can everything do what Jekyll can but with an build in/core i18n process.
I18n? Yes guys, not everything is just in english on this planet ;-) @bdkjones perhaps you can think about Middleman as an alternative or replacement for Jekyll.
@formspiel -- I use Jekyll because of GitHub's direct support of it on gh-pages. Any possibility that Jekyll could still be integrated alongside Middleman?
Another "want" from me! Just Googled CK support for Jekyll and came across this thread. Hoping CK support for J comes soon!
If this can be of any help to you, I'd like to say that if you're using Atom as your editor of choice there's a very good plugin that keeps serving and rebuilds a whole jekyll website whenever you write a blog post or modify anything inside it. You can also use it in conjunction with CodeKit to auto-refresh your browser whenever you make any changes (just remember to configure CodeKit to access an external server).
I personally like it very much.
This is the URL to the plugin: https://atom.io/packages/jekyll
Seconding all the amazing goodness! I am a fairly new codekit user but holy amaze-balls it's made finally using sass so easy!
I would also love to see Jekyll support, in the meant time good job @bdkjones!
Updating to add here is a (somewhat) simple work around posted on stack overflow.
Adding another vote to this request.
Because I'm using the 'baseurl' property I currently need to run Jykell's server. CK let's me link to that, but the auto refresh breaks as a result. Not at all a big deal, but it is nice to see the browser refresh without having to click over into it.
I did try to set up a Hook that would run Jykell's build routine when I saved one of the .md files, but I never got it working correctly. I think that CK's existing Markdown integration was conflicting.
Just started using Jekyll myself then ran into the CodeKit issue and am pretty bummed—found this thread and read through it all but it looks like it faded, is there any update to this since it's now well over two years old? Thanks!
@shanink - Still no integrated Jekyll support in CodeKit 2. No official word on if CodeKit 3 will support either.
Hi, I use Codekit with great pleasure for few years now and I recently worked on new projects with static site generator (Hugo & Jekyll). I'd love to keep using Codekit for these kind of projets ! Will Hugo/Jekyll be supported in Codekit ?
I’d love to support Jekyll, but I’m waiting for someone to add incremental build commands to Jekyll’s CLI. I need to be able to tell Jekyll “build files X, Y and Z” but right now I can only tell it to build the entire project.
Someone was going to add that a while ago, but I don’t think they ever did.
Sent from my iPhone
On Aug 28, 2018, at 01:51, AL20 [email protected] wrote:
Hi, I use Codekit with great pleasure for few years now and I recently worked on new projects with static site generator (Hugo & Jekyll). I'd love to keep using Codekit for these kind of projets ! Will Hugo/Jekyll be supported in Codekit ?
— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.
I understand, I hope this someone will read this thread and get back to it :) Thanks again for your great product, I love it !
At least there's some hope, according to this page on Jekyll's official site.
Like many people here, I'd love to see Jekyll support in CK. But since incremental builds are still experimental, I understand why it's not yet implemented.
