Static Web Site Hosting with Amazon S3 and Route 53

aws_logoWeb application frameworks have the current spotlight, which is why I started learning Ruby on Rails to get an idea what the fuss was about. But a big framework isn’t always the right tool for the job. Sometimes it’s just a set of static files to be served upon request. No server-side smarts necessary.

This was where I found myself when I wanted to put up a little web site to document my #rxbb8 project. I just wanted to document the design & build process, and I already had registered the domain rxbb8.com. The HTML content was simple enough to create directly in a text editor and styled with CSS from the Materialize library.

After I got a basic 1.0 version of my hand-crafted site, I uploaded the HTML (and associated images) to an Amazon S3 bucket. It only takes a few clicks to allow files in a S3 bucket to be web-accessible via a long cumbersome URL on Amazon AWS domain http://rxbb8.com.s3-website-us-west-2.amazonaws.com. Since I wanted this content to be accessible via the rxbb8.com domain I already registered, I started reading up on the AWS service named in geek-humor style as Route 53.

Route 53 is designed to handle the challenges of huge web properties, distributing workload across many computers in many regions. (No single computer could handled all global traffic for, say, netflix.com.) The challenge for a novice like myself is to figure out how to pull out just the one tool I need from this huge complex Swiss army knife.

Fortunately this usage case is popular enough for Amazon to have written a dedicated developer guide for it. Unfortunately, the page doesn’t have all the details. The writer helpfully points the reader to other reference articles, but those pages revert back to talking about complex deployments and again it takes effort to distill the simple basics out of the big feature list.

If you get distracted or lost, stay focused on this Cliff Notes version:

  1. Go into Route 53 dashboard, create a Hosted Zone for the domain.
  2. In that Hosted Zone, AWS has created two record sets by default. One of them is the NS type, write down the name servers listed.
  3. Go to your domain registrar and tell them to point name servers for the domain to the AWS name servers listed in step 2.
  4. Create S3 storage bucket for the site, enable static website hosting.
  5. Create a new Record Set in the Route 53 Hosted Zone. Select “Alias” to “Yes” and point alias target to the S3 storage bucket in step 4.

Repeat #4 and #5 for each sub-domain that needs to be hosted. (The AWS documentation created example.com and repeated 4-5 for www.example.com.)

And then… wait.

The update in step 3 needs time to propagate to name servers across the internet. My registrar said it may take up to 24 hours. In my case, I started getting intermittent results within 2 hours, but it took more than 12 hours before everything stabilized to the new settings.

But it was worth the effort to see version 1.0 of my created-from-scratch static web site up and running on my domain! And since it’s such a small and simple site with little traffic, it will cost me only a few pennies per month to host in this manner.

rxbb8.com.v1

Let the App… Materialize!

materializecsslogoAfter I got the Google sign-in working well enough for my Rails practice web app, the first order of business was to build the basic skeleton. This was a great practice exercise to take the pieces I learned in the Ruby on Rails Tutorial sample app and build something of my own design.

The initial pass implemented basic functionality but it didn’t look very appealing. I had focused on the Rails server-side code and left the client-side code simple plain HTML that would have been state-of-the-art in… maybe 1992?

Let’s make it look like something that belongs in 2017.

The Rails tutorial sample app used Bootstrap to improve the appearance and functionality of the client-side interface. I decided to take this opportunity to learn something new instead of doing the same thing. Since I’m using Google Sign-In in this app, I decided to adopt Google’s design concepts to my client-side appearance as well.

Web being the web, I knew I wouldn’t have to start from scratch. I knew about Google’s own Material Lite and thought that would be a good candidate before I learned it had been retired in favor of its successor, Material Components for the web. One of the touted advantages was improved integration with different web platforms. Sadly Rails was not among the platforms with examples ready-to-go.

I looked around for an existing project to help Rails projects adapt Google’s design language, and that’s when I found Materialize: A library that shares many usage patterns with Bootstrap. The style sheets are even written using SASS, native to default Rails apps, making for easy integration. Somebody has done that work and published it as Ruby gem materialize-sass, so all I had to do was add a single line to use Materialize in my app.

Of course I still had to put in the effort to revise all the view files in my web app to pick up Materialize styling and features. That took a few days, and the reward for this effort is a practice web app which no longer look so amateurish.

Simple Online Digital Photo Frame

The CarrierWave Playground project was created for experimentation with image upload. As intended, it helped me learn things about CarrierWave such as creating versions of the image scaled to different resolutions and extracting EXIF image metadata.

Obviously the image has to be displayed to prove that the upload was successful. I hadn’t intended to spend much time on the display side of things, but I started playing with the HTML and kept going. Logic was added for the browser to report its window size so the optimal image could be sent and scaled to fit. I had a button to reload the page, and it was fairly simple to change it from “reload the current page” to “navigate to another page”. Adding a JavaScript timer to execute this navigation… and voila! I had myself a rudimentary digital photo frame web app that loads and displays image in a sequence.

It’s fun but fairly crude. Brainstorming the possibilities, I imagine the following stages of sophistication:

Stage 1 – Basic: Where I am now, simple JavaScript that performs page navigation on a timer.

Problem: page blinks and abruptly shifts as new page is loaded. To avoid the abrupt shift, we have to eliminate the page switch.

Stage 2 – Add AJAX: Instead of a page navigation, perform a XMLHttpRequest to the server asking for information on the next image. Load the image in the background, and once complete, perform a smooth transition (fade out/fade in/etc.) from one image to the next.

Problem: Visual experience is at the mercy of the web browser, which probably has an address bar and other UI on screen. Also, the user’s screen will quickly go dark due to power saving features. To reliably solve both, I will need app-level access.

Stage 3 – Vendor-specific wrapper: Every OS platform has a way to allow web site authors an express lane into the app world. Microsoft offers the Windows App Studio. Apple has iOS web applications. Google has Android Web Apps.

Unknown: The JavaScript timer is a polling model, do we gain anything by moving to a server-push model? If so, that means…

Stage 4 – WebSocket: Photo updates are triggered by the server. Since I’m on Rails, the most obvious answer is to do this via WebSockets using Action Cable.

Looking at the list, I think I can tackle Stage 2 pretty soon if not immediately.

Stages 3 and 4 are more advanced and I’ll hold off for later.

Codecademy “Learn Sass” notes

SasslogoWhile learning Ruby on Rails, one of the things I put on my “look into this later” list was Sass. I knew it was related to CSS but didn’t know the details, I just noticed when the Rails generator created a controller, it created a .scss file under the stylesheets directory.

So when I received email from Codecademy notifying me that they have a new class on Sass… the “look into this later” became “let’s look into it now”.

Unlike Ruby on Rails, Sass is not a huge complicated system. It solves a fairly specific set of problems typical of CSS growing unwieldy as it grows with a project. It introduces some very nice concepts to keep CSS information organized. After banging my head on lots of walls with Ruby on Rails, it is refreshing to tackle a smaller-scope project and be able to understand what’s going on. The Codecademy format is well suited to teach a smaller scoped concept like Sass.

I was also mildly amused to learn that Sass is apparently written in Ruby. I don’t think it particularly matters what the implementation was, but it’s amusing to me to see Ruby applied in an entirely different way from Rails. The bonus is that, if I should try to debug or extend Sass myself, I wouldn’t be starting from scratch looking over its source code.

Being a fresh course, the Codecademy class had a few minor problems that still need to get ironed out. The flashcard example was supposed to flip on mouse hover… it never did anything for me. Too bad, because I think the effect would have been interesting.

I haven’t gotten far enough with Rails to think about making my web app pretty, but when I do, I know how to keep my style sheets manageable with Sass.

Peek under the hood of Bootstrap

After completing Codecademy’s “Make a Website” lesson, I decided to go explore a side track to look under the hood of the Bootstrap framework used in the lesson. I’m not going to dive deep (yet), but I wanted to break it down into a short list of names I expect to encounter again as I explore.

The actual run-time components of Bootstrap appears to be two Cascading Style Sheet (CSS) files and one JavaScript (JS) file. One of the two CSS files is an optional theme. This confirms that Bootstrap has no client-side requirements, just a web browser that can understand standard CSS & JS files.

On the developer side, things get more interesting.

Grunt is the build system used by the Bootstrap project to build the project code, the documentation files, and run the unit tests.

It’s not clear if the JavaScript files are worked on directly, but the CSS is definitely not. It is done with Less and compiled to CSS. Some parts in the documentation listed “Less/Sass” implying Sass is a similar thing. Maybe look into this later.

Once the product is rebuilt, the JavaScript code is automatically reviewed by JSHint. Then tests are executed in the PhantomJS headless JavaScript runtime orchestrated by QUnit testing framework for JavaScript.

The product documentation pages were generated by Jekyall. Don’t know what the input for Jekyall would look like, but the output is static HTML pages. It claims to be the engine behind GitHub pages, so I know I’ll run into this again when I explore GitHub.

Several package managers were listed. Looks like NPM is required for actually working on Bootstrap itself, though it can also be used for projects consuming Bootstrap. Bower and Composer are two other package managers that seem to apply only to Bootstrap consumers.

That’s the first cut. Some things are still fuzzy, and some things I thought were clear may actually be wrong. We’ll see!

Codecademy “Make a Website” notes

I’ve just completed the “Make a Website” lesson on Codecademy, because it made sense to start at the beginning and (re)learn the fundamentals. I knew some simple HTML going in so I had expected part of it to be review and part of it to be new material.

The review part was expected: the lesson went over basic concepts of HTML tags and their hierarchical structure, then went into fine-tuning appearance via CSS.

But the new material was a surprise. After the CSS unit completed teaching about backgrounds and borders and spacing, it promised the next unit is about content and page layout. I thought “OK, good, now we’re getting into stuff I don’t know.”

The next unit began by introducing the Bootstrap framework to manage page layout. It was still an informative and fun interactive lesson, but I was left disappointed by the departure from HTML fundamentals.

It felt incomplete, like a math class that skipped doing addition with pencil and paper and instead going straight to using a calculator. Yeah, I’m probably not going to do it by hand ever again, but I wanted a lesson to teach me how to do it at least once. I would have preferred the lesson to go a bit into doing HTML layout the hard way, then say “Now that you know how to do it the hard way, let’s do it the easy way with Bootstrap.” Doing it both ways would give me a better feel of how HTML layout works and how Bootstrap makes it easier.

The Codecademy lesson worked as advertised, I’ll just have to fill this hole in my knowledge with something else.