@nickgarlis
I have created a poll above for your PR #1

At the same time I am wondering if yours or some other method would support online demonstration of a new feature? Your PR is about local, but what about remote testing?

Local workflows are very much a matter of personal preference, but there should be some objective method for contributors to demonstrate the effects of a modification, so that i can merge with confidence, any ideas?

@epidrome The test directory is not meant for demonstrating new features. It is meant for contributors to test new changes locally directly from the source code.

As far as online testing is concerned I don't think it makes any sense to make something like that since contributors should only pull request changes in their source code and not their test commits.

so, how do i know that a pull request is worth merging if i can't see it in action?

@epidrome I now understand what you are suggesting. Remote testing would actually make sense. The solution is fairly simple, you only need to copy the contents of gh-pages branch into a docs directory inside of your master branch and serve from master/docs.

Thanks! Thus, i close #1 in favour of a future PR based on the docs folder.

Moreover, i suggest that the test folder does not include any images, only include the bare minimum _config.ym index.md Gemfile.

It might be necessary to first add some conditionals about the presence of images in the header.html

/remind me to check how the site works without images in one week

@epidrome set a reminder for Feb 28th 2018

👋 @epidrome, check how the site works without images