[discussion] Gitea pages server (GitHub pages, web hosting, serving git repository contents as a site)

[wxiaoguang]

Like GitHub pages, there are many feature requests for Gitea builtin pages service.

The initial issue is #302 , at that time (2016~2019) , the conclusion was that it's not on the roadmap.

Today, more and more people are asking about "Pages" feature, so I'd like to summary them, and maybe it's time to discuss a new conclusion.

Relate issues:

• Gitea 'pages' #302
• Gitea Pages #2208
• host static html and/or markdown pages #3834
• Pages, but as subdir rather than subdomain #6163
• feat: add pages command #9811
• Thoughts about Gitea Pages #19129
• github style pages #23516

If Gitea wants to put this feature on its roadmap, it's a big feature, and it needs to be designed first, especially for security.

If this feautre is not on Gitea's roadmap, then I think it's better to provide a clear document about how to setup a pages service with production-level servers, eg: Codeberg pages-server , it's already mentioned in many issues, and it works well for Gitea.

[lunny]

There is also an interesting closed PR #9811 .

[JakobDev]

I don't think, Gitea needs to offer a own server. A existing server like e.g. can be used. And on Gitea side we can add a config like this:

[pages]
ENABLED = true
DIRECTORY = /path/to/directory

So Gitea just needs to copy the files to the specific directory (could also be some mounted directory from another server) and let the chosen Server Software (e.g. ngnix) do the rest.

[lunny]

OK. Maybe we can have an HTML Package concept like npm package. And if a special domain could be bind, it will serve as a static server. Looks like an interesting thing.

[wxiaoguang]

let the chosen Server Software (e.g. ngnix) do the rest.

That's also a good idea (especially for personal or small team usage), if the reverse-proxy servers could proxy the requests to Gitea's exported / raw / package handlers to fetch contents. (I haven't tried but I guess it might be feasible)

[KN4CK3R]

I talked with @lunny and the generic package type could store and save pre-compiled HTML output. It may be necessary to create a new package type for that job to tweak the current ui or hide it from users. An action could then create the files and store them as a package which a proxy could serve with a different domain.

[lunny]

A dynamic rule could be configured from action to implement dynamic sub domain. We can write a PageAction to make the process easier.

[6543]

I am against add a build in pages server ... as I generalize the Pages-Server,

so anybody should be capable to setup it. It's also a single binary with good default settings,

and the only thing that is not generic are the error pages, that show the codeberg logo at the moment. witch https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/pages-server/issues/199 should solve.

Just blow up gitea for no good reason is bad

[6543]

as it's requested a lot I would just add this project directly in the feature-comparsion-sheet and document it well.
-> make it easy to discover

If you are afraid/don't like that it's tied to much to CB I'm also happy to maintain a fork that just switches the default settings to gitea and its logo ...

PS: added a dedicated issue to track selfhosting: https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/pages-server/issues/207

[6543]

PS: that should not hinder to build actions to build the pages branch ... it does integrate with that well too ...

[jolheiser]

I do think giving pages-server more visibility would help, and I also agree this doesn't need to be solved in Gitea main.

[silverwind]

Would call the feature "Web hosting", Wikipedia also calls it that.

[wxiaoguang]

I'm not sure whether the "reverse-proxy"-kind approach works, if it does, then it seems an easy way for personal usage or small team usage. If they don't care about security, they could even use the same domain (that's user's choice 😂)

Actually I also feel it's better to use production-level Pages-Server to provide pages service, instead of blowing up Gitea. I just saw some new issues about this proposal, so I opened this discussion issue (to help users with such requirements). I guess a document with some samples would help future users who need this feature.

---

Update: I edited the issue title to avoid misleading.

[lunny]

I am against add a build in pages server ... as I generalize the Pages-Server,

so anybody should be capable to setup it. It's also a single binary with good default settings,

and the only thing that is not generic are the error pages, that show the codeberg logo at the moment. witch https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/pages-server/issues/199 should solve.

Just blow up gitea for no good reason is bad

Of course, that's why we closed so many request issues. For now, the possible answers of the requirement I think are two.

1. Use https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/pages-server
2. Use a reverse proxy server that redirects to the package URL of Gitea.

[6543]

I'll create a pull to the docu :)

• https://gitea.com/gitea/awesome-gitea/pulls/108
• Update documentation to explain which projects allow Gitea to host static pages #23993
• https://gitea.com/gitea/awesome-gitea/pulls/110