Is this project dead???

[jimklo]

It seems like @envygeeks hasn't done anything in over a year while issues and pull requests pile up and go stale or folks just close pull requests as they become dated.

I feel this project is dead, which is unfortunate, since the main jekyll project references this docker-container. Worse is there isn't really enough documentation to figure out how to build the images for different architectures, given the popularity of Apple Silicon and Raspberry Pi - the current build doesn't work on M2 (cannot build eventmachine for amd64 under Rosetta).

Has anyone made fork that works? Does anyone have an alternative solution?

Thanks,

/jk

[JV-conseil]

Hi 👋

While waiting for @envygeeks to update this repo, I've pushed to Docker Hub an updated version for jekyll/builder image:
https://hub.docker.com/r/jvconseil/jekyll-docker

See also PR #369

Best,
@JV-conseil

[jimklo]

@JV-conseil unfortunately I went ahead and just defined my own Dockerfile and entrypoint.sh that is much simpler than what this container provides, but functions mostly in a compatible way.

[akc42]

@JV-conseil I came here looking for why my project with this image failed to build and ended up trying yours. Worked perfectly. Thank you

[rockstorm101]

Has anyone made fork that works? Does anyone have an alternative solution?

Probably a bit late to the party here but I've been successfully using a different approach. Other than using these pre-built images I generate a custom image for each blog/site that won't need to be updated unless you change any dependencies. This way you build your image once and it runs fast, smooth and reliably every time afterwards. No need to re-install any gems or anything every time you build your blog. See https://github.com/rockstorm101/jekyll-docker

[mattccrampton]

@envygeeks seems to be looking for someone to take this over, at least that was the case a few years ago: https://x.com/envygeeks/status/1362111326546444290

[mattr-]

@envygeeks 👋 Hello! Would you interested in allowing this repo and any of the necessary credentials to be transferred to the jekyll organization? We'd like to resurrect the docker images.

[envygeeks]

Me, and Jekyll Core departed on a pretty sour note when I had to have my lawyer get involved and start flexing at Docker and GitHub when a GitHub/Microsoft employee tried to take my work and cut me out of it because of an internal dispute that was entirely unrelated to my intellectual property. I don't know if I feel safe or have any plans to let Microsoft take over this repo, but I may be willing to allow Microsoft access to this repository so that maintenance can continue, I may even be willing to update the repository to be more modern too ahead of that.

[mattr-]

@envygeeks I've discovered that the Jekyll org has access to the docker organization already. If we (meaning the Jekyll org) use completely new source code to publish new images, would that satisfy your desire to avoid anyone associated with Microsoft having access to your intellectual property?

[mattccrampton]

Just throwing in a quick note that if these docker images get updated as @mattr- is suggesting, it will really make it easier on those of us using Jekyll and debating between sticking with the framework vs moving to something else that has more modern supported docker images. Really appreciate everyone working together on this kind of thing, thanks so much.

And thanks @envygeeks for all the development and support you made to the Jekyll project in the past. Just looking at it from the outside, there's been a lot of energy put into this, really appreciate it.