Migrate events from 2015 and before about devopsdays-web

[mattstratton]

@jedi4ever if you could offer some insight into the traffic that the older sites get, it will help me make a design decision on how the migration occurs.

Right now, there are a couple different ways to handle it:

1. Create new events (in the new structure) for all the old events. This involves creating a data file for each event, mapping sponsors to the sponsor structure, and updating every file in each "old" event folder to use the new templating language. I would estimate the level of effort per event to be 1-2 hours of VERY boring work.
2. Copy the existing generated HTML files from webby for each event to the corresponding file patths in hugo. Hugo will ignore any .html files, so they would not be evaluated. This is by far the easiest way to do it (the whole thing will probably take an hour or two, as opposed to 1-2 hours per event). The downside is that the legacy/old events become truly static. If/when we change the site design, these old URL's (which will always still work, with the same URL's as today) will just always have the "classic" DevOpsDays look to them.

The larger issue with the second option that I thought of (and just now realized doesn't apply) is the footer that lists all the events. That footer only exists on the homepage as it it is; the single event pages do not use it.

That being said, I see no reason to not go with option 2. Thoughts?

[jedi4ever]

@mattstratton I'm good with option 1 - as long as the URLs stay the same we're good.
On a side note we are currently using disquss for feedback - do you include that? or we don't bother

[bridgetkromhout]

On a side note we are currently using disquss for feedback - do you include that? or we don't bother

We're going to leave off the whole "upload your proposals ahead of time" thing. It's under-used and most places are using an external CFP processing site now.

[mattstratton]

Two notes -

1. My comment was incorrect. Option 2 is the proper option. There is no reason to do all the extra heavy lifting.

2. Disqus can easily be accommodated if needed (it's baked into hugo) but as @bridgetkromhout said, it's not heavily used so we aren't going to bring it along for the ride. It would be easy to add in the future if need be.

[jedi4ever]

@mattstratton me too, I meant indeed option2 is ok

[bridgetkromhout]

As I understand it, after Saturday April 16th @mattstratton will migrate whatever's in the old repo, with consideration for #104, #102, and maybe #142?

At that point we'll stop merging PRs on the old site for anything 2015 and before.

[bridgetkromhout]

This continues to be in progress.

[bridgetkromhout]

@mattstratton, please look over #292 and determine if this issue can now be closed - thanks!

[mattstratton]

I think we can close this one.