From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Eric Schulte Subject: Re: Google Summer of Code -- 3 Org projects for our first participation! Date: Fri, 04 May 2012 17:04:02 -0400 Message-ID: <87sjff7j5p.fsf@gmx.com> References: <8762cpad2q.fsf@gnu.org> <4F9653BD.7030201@wilkesley.net> <87obqh8s6m.fsf@googlemail.com> <4F98A7F0.6080405@neilsmithline.com> <87mx5zrklf.fsf@altern.org> <4FA45A39.2080108@neilsmithline.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:48782) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SQRXn-0002LK-V6 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 04 May 2012 19:04:13 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SQRXl-00026j-SC for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 04 May 2012 19:04:11 -0400 Received: from mailout-us.gmx.com ([74.208.5.67]:58407 helo=mailout-us.mail.com) by eggs.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SQRXl-00026V-Le for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 04 May 2012 19:04:09 -0400 In-Reply-To: <4FA45A39.2080108@neilsmithline.com> (Neil Smithline's message of "Fri, 04 May 2012 18:37:45 -0400") List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Neil Smithline Cc: Bastien , emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Neil Smithline writes: > Bastien, > > I've been looking at the bugpile Worg page (very nice page - good work > Thorsten or whomever) and don't see why you say: > >> I don't see how github could use such >> a setup to produce HTML files from Org (unless github runs an Emacs >> batch query for exporting HTML... which seems very unlikely - and >> wrong by design anyway. > > I understand that Emacs is a bit of a behemoth in terms of CPU when > being started and always in terms of memory. That being said, why does > it seem "wrong by design" to have Github running an Emacs server and > sending Org --> HTML jobs to it with emacsclient? > I think this issue is unrelated to the bugpile proposal. As you mention all that is required to export Org-mode files to HTML is a daemon emacs process and emacsclient. My guess (although this is really a question for the people at github) is that adding Emacs to their web software stack is simply too heavy weight (in terms of processing time and complexity) of a tool for simple file export. As one example of the complexity involved; imagine I push up a .org file to github which includes an embedded code block with shell code and the ":exports results" header argument. Unless the github admins have turned off code block execution, such a document would allow me to execute arbitrary shell code on their servers with the permissions of whoever created the emacs daemon. > > Just a head's up, once you answer the above question, I'm going to ask > you what can be done to fix the problem :-) > I would be happy to see full support for Org-mode->html export on github, but I'd be surprised if you could convince the github admins that the payoff is worth the cost. Best, > > Neil > > > > Neil Smithline > http://www.neilsmithline.com > Proud GNU Emacs user since 1986, v. 18.24. > > On 4/26 03:57 , Bastien wrote: >> Hi Neil, >> >> Neil Smithline writes: >> >>> I've run into this problem dealing with the weak presentation of Org Mode >>> files on Github. Github uses the Ruby gem org-ruby >>> (https://github.com/bdewey/org-ruby) to convert .org files to HTML. I've >>> added a feature or two to org-ruby but really feel that trying to >>> completely re-implement Org Mode in a Ruby gem is a losing battle. >> >> What will help org-ruby (and github's support of org files) is to >> stabilize the syntax of .org files as much as possible. We are >> currently working in this direction. >> >> org-ruby's main job is to convert .org files into HTML or textile files. >> >>> If I understand the project correctly, a working iOrg could be used to >>> support Github's rendering of .org files. Github could just drop the use of >>> org-ruby and use iOrg as an external converter for formatting .org files. >> >> As I understand it, iOrg will convert .org files to HTML using the >> internal Org's HTML exporter. I don't see how github could use such >> a setup to produce HTML files from Org (unless github runs an Emacs >> batch query for exporting HTML... which seems very unlikely - and >> wrong by design anyway. >> >> Let's see how iOrg evolves but let's stick to the bugpile for now. >> >> If the list can specifically help about org-ruby issues, let's help! >> >> All best, >> >>> PS: And the answer is "Yes. I am aware that vehemently suggesting a project >>> is equivalent to offering to help with it." :-D >> >> Good :) >> > > -- Eric Schulte http://cs.unm.edu/~eschulte/