4 ms·
IMHO, since it's a static website, they can use a static website generator and simply usage something like GitLab pages to deploy it (for free). There is a bit
by hobarrera 10y ago
IMHO, since it's a static website, they can use a static website generator and simply usage something like GitLab pages to deploy it (for free).
There is a bit of work to be done, but it shouldn't be too terrible if the templates and stuff are okay.
- johncolanduoni 10y agoOr just throw a CDN with a decent cache lifetime in front of the Rails app and scale the Heroku side way down if you don't want to go through the hastle of changing anything. It's pretty much static after all.
- msumpter 10y agoI was thinking the same thing after reviewing the repo and output HTML but I wonder if that would really lower the monthly hosting costs for the Heroku instance and the various addons. It would be simple to modify the RoR app to output the proper caching headers that would allow any CDN to cache the HTML output and obey the various cache limits, but on demand rendering the output from time to time is still required once the cache expires. I think moving the site to a normal static site generator (like Jekyll) would deliver the most bang for the buck but would be quite the transition. The site would only need to be built upon a new commit and with the proper site generator it will only update the underlying HTML files that require a change. Then syncing the update HTML to whatever CDN is chosen.
- jon-wood 10y agoIts all armchair engineering, but it may be feasible to keep the current setup, but replace the current deployment process with starting up the application and snapshotting it with a crawl from wget or similar.