Find a maintainer or update support condition

[philoserf]

Before submitting an issue, please be sure to

• Read the contributing instructions
• Update to the latest Gem version (run bundle update github-pages)

This issue affects

• The site generated by GitHub Pages
• Building sites locally

The GitHub Pages Gem is intended to help users replicate the GitHub Pages build environment locally. If your issue affects both the hosted version and the version previewed locally, you may be better suited reporting seeking support in other forums.

What did you do (e.g., steps to reproduce)

I watched this repository and related Jekyll GitHub Pages repositories begin to look like abandoned-ware.

What did you expect to happen?

I expected somebody with authority in the project to maintain the code, respond to potential contributors, and to handle security issues identified with its dependencies. I expect GitHub to maintain and improve the system it created.

What happened instead?

I saw the project slowly increase in the number of unhandled and unacknowledged issues, pull requests, and security findings.

Additional information

• Link to the live site (if applicable): n/a
• Link to the source repo (if applicable): n/a

[TWiStErRob]

@yoannchaudet as recent committer on master, can you please give an update on plans re this gem. Is it alive/is it dead? Are you maybe secretly working towards #651 🤞? It would be nice if the documentation reflected GitHub's current recommendation as to how to create a GitHub Pages site in 2024. e.g. this page still recommends to use the seemingly unmaintained pages-gem.

[0xdevalias]

It would be nice if the documentation reflected GitHub's current recommendation as to how to create a GitHub Pages site in 2024. e.g. this page still recommends to use the seemingly unmaintained pages-gem.

@TWiStErRob Instead of raising a GitHub documentation issue on this gem's issues.. did you raise the issue officially so the docs team can actually address it?

• https://docs.github.com/contributing
• https://github.com/github/docs/issues/new/choose
• https://github.com/github/docs/blob/main/content/pages/setting-up-a-github-pages-site-with-jekyll/creating-a-github-pages-site-with-jekyll.md

Edit: Which I have now done:

• Remove references to long outdated and unmaintained github-pages gem from the docs docs#36740

---

Are you maybe secretly working towards #651 🤞?

See this comment I made recently (and the 3 older comments it references from as far back as 2022 in that same issue) pointing you to all of the relevant modern documentation you could ever need:

• Support for Jekyll 4.0 #651 (comment)

[TWiStErRob]

I don't remember exactly, but I think my thinking was get some updates from an "official" source and armed with that knowledge raise the doc issue. I guess you're right that raising the issue in docs might just make them ask the same question internally. Thanks for doing it!

[0xdevalias]

I don't remember exactly, but I think my thinking was get some updates from an "official" source and armed with that knowledge raise the doc issue

@TWiStErRob nods, that definitely makes sense.

I guess you're right that raising the issue in docs might just make them ask the same question internally.

Here's hoping!

[philoserf]

The confusion continues. See github/docs#36740 (comment)

[0xdevalias]

Here's the latest on this; if anyone has thoughts on how best the docs should be updated, including which pages/etc, please head over to github/docs#36740 and leave your thoughts there:

I finally got the go-ahead from both the docs and pages teams, so we can discuss the kind of note you think would work best. My instinct is a call-out at the beginning of the article you've mentioned here along the lines of "Jekyll is no longer being updated, and Actions is better for most use-cases," with a link to whatever "about Actions" or quickstart article we have. But that's just initial thoughts, I'm definitely open to other options. Are there any other articles you know of that would benefit from the same treatment?

Originally posted by @Sharra-writes in github/docs#36740 (comment)

[0xdevalias]

Updates from:

• Remove references to long outdated and unmaintained github-pages gem from the docs docs#36740

Okay! I've added a note to all the relevant Jekyll docs I could find, confirmed that information about implementing Jekyll with Actions and the .nojekyll file is available on our site (even if you probably have to use Google to find it without knowing the file name), and cleaned up the "who can use this feature" box since no one was reading it anyway. The note is also a reusable, so if anyone finds another article that could use the warning, it can easily be added. Hopefully all this makes your lives a little easier going forward. 🤞

Originally posted by @Sharra-writes in github/docs#36740 (comment)

PR of that change for future reference:

• Reusable clarifying Actions is fully supported while Jekyll is not docs#39148

Example of a page that includes it:

• https://docs.github.com/en/pages/setting-up-a-github-pages-site-with-jekyll/creating-a-github-pages-site-with-jekyll
  • 

[philoserf]

Looking good. The effort is appreciated. Perhaps the same note should be added to the readme here.