Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

fix(website): revert auto-fetch blog posts on home page #13169

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 16, 2023
Merged

Conversation

dionysuzx
Copy link
Collaborator

@dionysuzx dionysuzx commented Feb 16, 2023

This reverts commit 9fbf102.

This PR will fix the site freezing on mobile. Right now the site is frozen / animation is blocked by the loading of the script. Probably some async/sync thing we need to fix. Tagging @Jaapiehetaapie for visibility.

@dionysuzx
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Also @Jaapiehetaapie , for your knowledge, I believe the correct way to do this would be at build time. So we don't even need to wait for a mirror API call, means we don't rely on that API if it is down, and also faster performance. We can store the json information locally. I can certainly take on this change (or another contributor), but if you're up for it, I think that's a better solution. If it is a GitHub action, I believe we can click the action in the GitHub UI as well to invoke the job, in case we need to re-fetch the blog posts.

@Jaapiehetaapie
Copy link
Contributor

Also @Jaapiehetaapie , for your knowledge, I believe the correct way to do this would be at build time. So we don't even need to wait for a mirror API call, means we don't rely on that API if it is down, and also faster performance. We can store the json information locally. I can certainly take on this change (or another contributor), but if you're up for it, I think that's a better solution. If it is a GitHub action, I believe we can click the action in the GitHub UI as well to invoke the job, in case we need to re-fetch the blog posts.

Sorry for the inconvenience i caused. I could give it a shot, but pretty new to this, so don't know if i will manage.

@dionysuzx dionysuzx added this pull request to the merge queue Feb 16, 2023
Merged via the queue into main with commit ce7329a Feb 16, 2023
@dionysuzx dionysuzx deleted the fix-mobile branch February 16, 2023 18:07
@github-actions github-actions bot mentioned this pull request Feb 16, 2023
@dantaik
Copy link
Contributor

dantaik commented Feb 20, 2023

Also @Jaapiehetaapie , for your knowledge, I believe the correct way to do this would be at build time. So we don't even need to wait for a mirror API call, means we don't rely on that API if it is down, and also faster performance. We can store the json information locally. I can certainly take on this change (or another contributor), but if you're up for it, I think that's a better solution. If it is a GitHub action, I believe we can click the action in the GitHub UI as well to invoke the job, in case we need to re-fetch the blog posts.

I'd rather to fetch the data in real time as in the future, we won't do frequent redeployment at all.

@shadab-taiko
Copy link
Contributor

Also @Jaapiehetaapie , for your knowledge, I believe the correct way to do this would be at build time. So we don't even need to wait for a mirror API call, means we don't rely on that API if it is down, and also faster performance. We can store the json information locally. I can certainly take on this change (or another contributor), but if you're up for it, I think that's a better solution. If it is a GitHub action, I believe we can click the action in the GitHub UI as well to invoke the job, in case we need to re-fetch the blog posts.

I'd rather to fetch the data in real time as in the future, we won't do frequent redeployment at all.

To do this maybe we can create an lambda function that can cache the results of this API and update it regularly.

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.

5 participants