> On Jan. 27, 2015, 8:04 p.m., Christopher Tubbs wrote:
> > TESTING.md, lines 30-32
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/30236/diff/5/?file=836999#file836999line30>
> >
> >     `mvn test` doesn't even work in our build, IIRC, due to the 
> > multi-module non-jar dependency for the native-maps. It's probably 
> > sufficient to simply suggest `mvn package`, and note that it executes the 
> > maven build lifecycle through unit testing phase.
> 
> kturner wrote:
>     Next patch will have an update related to this.  However I would like you 
> to review them.  Will leave issue open for now as a reminder.  Can close this 
> after you look at changes.   Open another issue against new patch if you see 
> more improvements.

`mvn test` does work.  I simplified the instructions there and referenced the 
surefire plugin.


> On Jan. 27, 2015, 8:04 p.m., Christopher Tubbs wrote:
> > INSTALL.md, lines 152-223
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/30236/diff/5/?file=836994#file836994line152>
> >
> >     I would like to see upgrade hints/tips/suggestions/procedures to be 
> > documented in the release notes on the website.
> >     
> >     Perhaps they are appropriate here also, but I feel like those are going 
> > to be very version-specific, and these README files aren't going to get a 
> > lot of attention over time, and this information is going to get stale 
> > and/or lengthy and confusing.
> 
> kturner wrote:
>     The instructions will need to be updated for 1.7, could create a follow 
> on issue about 1.7 upgrade instructions that includes this.  I suppose one 
> option is to not carry these instructions forward for now, and refer to them 
> in the old README when the 1.7 upgrade instructions are written.
>     
>     > these README files aren't going to get a lot of attention over time
>     
>     Well I hope this reorganization of the content will encourage maintenance 
> (or no longer discourage maintenance, as I feel the previous state of things 
> did).  I do not think docs on the website have a better chance of being 
> maintained vs docs in src.
> 
> Christopher Tubbs wrote:
>     I think the INSTALL.md primary target audience is first-time installers. 
> Upgrade-related caveats and items to take notice of seem appropriate for the 
> release notes. It's probably fine to include here as well. I just have more 
> often seen projects provide upgrade instructions/notes on the website.
>     
>     > I do not think docs on the website have a better chance of being 
> maintained vs docs in src.
>     
>     In general, I agree. But, that's not the case for release notes... which 
> get attention on every release.

Dropped the instructions for now and opened 
[ACCUMULO-3551](https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-3551)


> On Jan. 27, 2015, 8:04 p.m., Christopher Tubbs wrote:
> > BUILD.md, lines 35-71
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/30236/diff/5/?file=836993#file836993line35>
> >
> >     I'm not sure this section is even necessary here. It seems more 
> > appropriate to developer documentation on the website.
> 
> kturner wrote:
>     Its useful information, so it needs to go somewhere.  Build instructions 
> for 1.4, 1.5 and 1.6 are very different.  Its nice when dealing with those 
> older versions to be able to look at their build instructions in the README.  
> I am not sure if version specific build instructions would be properly 
> maintained on the website.   IMO keeping these instructions versioned with 
> source is perferable to putting them on the website.  If we do keep these 
> instructions in source, I think BUILD.md is an ok place.
> 
> Christopher Tubbs wrote:
>     We have to consider the target audience. For build instructions for the 
> target audience of "consumers of the source tarball" (the official release), 
> I think the BUILD.md file makes sense. However, these instructions I've 
> highlighted do not target that audience (as stated explicitly in the 
> paragraph under the `Iterative Experimentation` header). I think these 
> instructions would confuse the primary target audience and should not be in 
> the BUILD.md file. It is useful, though, and we need to put it somewhere... I 
> just think that somewhere should be in a developer section on the website, 
> rather in the BUILD.md file targeted towards non-developers.

I dropped the instructions and moved contents of BUILD.md to README.md


- kturner


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/30236/#review69865
-----------------------------------------------------------


On Jan. 31, 2015, 12:55 a.m., kturner wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/30236/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Jan. 31, 2015, 12:55 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for accumulo.
> 
> 
> Bugs: ACCUMULO-1515
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-1515
> 
> 
> Repository: accumulo
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Reorganized information in README and converted to markdown.  
> 
> At this point I like the INSTALL.md document, but do not really like the 
> content of the README.md ATM.  Putting this up for review to get suggestions.
> 
> See how the markdown looks on GH : 
> https://github.com/keith-turner/accumulo/tree/ACCUMULO-1515
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   INSTALL.md PRE-CREATION 
>   NOTICE af212c2 
>   README 4ebb078 
>   README.md PRE-CREATION 
>   TESTING cf2afba 
>   TESTING.md PRE-CREATION 
>   assemble/src/main/assemblies/component.xml 3f18da3 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/30236/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> kturner
> 
>

Reply via email to