Skip to content

Start new webiste#300

Closed
pavlenex wants to merge 28 commits into
stratum-mining:mainfrom
pavlenex:new
Closed

Start new webiste#300
pavlenex wants to merge 28 commits into
stratum-mining:mainfrom
pavlenex:new

Conversation

@pavlenex
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

@pavlenex pavlenex commented Feb 5, 2026

This PR replaced the old website with new redesign, better explanation of SV2 and more modern, slick desgin. Codebase for the new website is much cleaner than previous one which was nearly impossible to contribute or understand.

Screen.Recording.2026-02-06.at.18.59.24.mov

Preview https://deploy-preview-300--stratumprotocol.netlify.app/

To-do:

@netlify
Copy link
Copy Markdown

netlify Bot commented Feb 5, 2026

Deploy Preview for startling-capybara-2231ea failed.

Name Link
🔨 Latest commit 9e8057a
🔍 Latest deploy log https://app.netlify.com/projects/startling-capybara-2231ea/deploys/69848798eeb39a000784c59b

@netlify
Copy link
Copy Markdown

netlify Bot commented Feb 5, 2026

Deploy Preview for stratumprotocol ready!

Name Link
🔨 Latest commit e2d6c18
🔍 Latest deploy log https://app.netlify.com/projects/stratumprotocol/deploys/69883de90b605500087209b8
😎 Deploy Preview https://deploy-preview-300--stratumprotocol.netlify.app
📱 Preview on mobile
Toggle QR Code...

QR Code

Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify project configuration.

fix  redirects and attempt to fix specs rendering
Comment thread index.html Outdated
Comment thread index.html Outdated
@pavlenex
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

pavlenex commented Feb 6, 2026

@GitGab19 I've added the wizard, and for now I think it's in good shape. Perhaps @lucasbalieiro wants to take overall look at the codebase as well. I leave it to you guys from here. My next step will be proposing design update to sv2-wizard repo to ensure some sort of consistency between the new website and the wizard. Looking forward to hearing thoughts, bug reports and code reviews. This is done with AI Tools Replit, Claude and Codex, and with a lot of local user testing, so I don't think it's a first pass AI slop, I did fair share of reviewing on my end, I believe an actual developer with front-end experience should give it a look. On my end you can also take over this PR if you guys prefer.

@pavlenex
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

pavlenex commented Feb 6, 2026

The last commit here 7f704e1 ensures compatibility with stratum-mining/sv2-wizard#10, that's why if you press Start Mining on netlify preview things will look messy until we merge that PR which uplifts the SV2-Wizard. If someone wants to test both, deploying SV2-Wizard locally and checking stratum-mining/sv2-wizard#10, is likely the best option, in that case you'll have to point the wizard source to be local "sv2-wizard": "file:../sv2-wizard" in package-lock.json.

Final output is

Screen.Recording.2026-02-06.at.18.59.24.mov

@lucasbalieiro
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

lucasbalieiro commented Feb 7, 2026

AI is getting a little scary 😂

one of my biggest issues with the previous implementation was how we handled the specs and used Rehype to parse them. Marked is much simpler and a better fit for our use case, and Rehype ended up being used in a very convoluted way.

In the new implementation, spec syncing appears to be manual via updates to the content/specification folder. Is that intentional, or am I misunderstanding something?

restore spec submodule at src/specification
@pavlenex
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

pavlenex commented Feb 7, 2026

@lucasbalieiro The way it should work is:

  1. There's a change in the specs repo, a merge to main. A workflow in the spec repo dispatches an event to the website repo (update-submodule). On the currently deployed website it looks like this
  2. The website repo receives that event and runs git submodule update, commits, and pushes.
  3. That push triggers site CI/deploy.

I think you're right and right now was manual, which isn't something we want.

I pushed a new commit, 2cb04d4 but would appreciate the review as it'll be vibe-coded and I don't mind you taking it over. I am pretty confident in the landing page, as I can read and understand that code, but /blog and /specification is already beyond my understanding.

If you prefer I can do only a landing page in a new PR, and leave it up to you to implement blog and specs if it makes you feel more comfortable about the quality of code, or you just take a look at those sections after these pushes, make more comments and I can try to path them up.

Just let me know which direction you'd like to go for?

@lucasbalieiro
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

@pavlenex, I think you can go with vibecoding this, no issues on my side. I can build on top of it later if needed by suggesting commits to cherry-pick or proposing solutions in comments. just orient the AI to place the module under the new path content/specification, since this will be the default directory now.

from the commit you linked, it looks like it was trying to preserve backward compatibility by adding the submodule to src/specification. that’s because the specs workflow points to that path: https://github.com/stratum-mining/sv2-spec/blob/83799d3cf624a12f17be2aca4bae650c3769cb46/.github/workflows/dispatch-update.yml#L15

I think it’s better for us to update the specs workflow instead of maintaining backward compatibility, as a follow-up PR there once we merged here.

While you make the AI do this I’ll be reviewing the other repos where I was tagged about the new ui.

But if the AI is having a hardtime doing the submodule, just ping me. I can do it by hand, with no problem

@lucasbalieiro
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

I also think I can improve that workflow so that in the future, if we ever change the specification path in stratumprotocol.org again, we won’t have to clutter the specs repo with random PRs just to update it. I still need to test it first.

if you can set up the submodule and make the website render from there, that would be a great step forward

@pavlenex
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

pavlenex commented Feb 7, 2026

Thanks for pointers @lucasbalieiro, indeed my goal was to preserve backwards compatibility and not put too much pressure on specs, but I agree it's easier and cleaner to nest everything under /content.

My main goal with this is to provide some foundation for uplifted branding so we can define a shared design system for SV2-UI and SV2-Wizard as well. Please when you're available next week, ping me on Discord so you me and @GitGab19 can jump on a quick call to agree on these moving parts.

@lucasbalieiro
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Thanks for pointers @lucasbalieiro, indeed my goal was to preserve backwards compatibility and not put too much pressure on specs, but I agree it's easier and cleaner to nest everything under /content.

@pavlenex,I don’t think we need to change anything in the specs CI. We can ignore its arguments and hardcode the submodule path. Instead of using github.event.client_payload.module, we set the path directly to content/specification. If the path needs to change later, we only update the stratumprotocol.org workflow rather than modifying the specs CI.

Updated stratumprotocol.org workflow:

name: Update submodule

on:
  repository_dispatch:
    types:
      - update-submodule
jobs:
  update:
    runs-on: ubuntu-latest
    steps:
      - uses: actions/checkout@v4
        with:
          token: ${{ secrets.PAT }}
          submodules: recursive
      - name: Update module
        run: |
          git submodule update --init --recursive --checkout -f --remote -- content/specification
          git config --global user.name "GitHub Action"
          git config --global user.email "noreply@github.com"
          git commit -am "deploy: content/specification - ${{github.event.client_payload.sha}}"
          git push

@pavlenex pavlenex closed this Feb 8, 2026
@pavlenex pavlenex mentioned this pull request Feb 9, 2026
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants