+1 for having Wiki for devs and users. Even though editing interface is not so native and obvious (comparing to Google docs), but, at least, it will be already put in one place and should be much more easy to search and discover.
The only my concern about Wiki (based on using it in other different projects) that, in course of time, the information becomes outdated and weak structured which makes this not so valuable and even deceptive. WBR, Alexey > On 12 Jun 2018, at 18:01, Robert Bradshaw <rober...@google.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 2:40 PM Kenneth Knowles <k...@google.com > <mailto:k...@google.com>> wrote: > OK, yea, that all makes sense to me. Like this? > > - site/documentation: writing just for users > - site/contribute: basic stuff as-is, writing for users to entice them, > links to the next... > - wiki/contributors: contributors writing just for each other > > And you also have > > - wiki/users: users writing for users > > That's interesting. > > Yep. We don't have to start wiki/users right away, but it could be useful > down the line. > > > On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 2:30 PM Robert Bradshaw <rober...@google.com > <mailto:rober...@google.com>> wrote: > On Fri, Jun 8, 2018 at 2:18 PM Kenneth Knowles <k...@google.com > <mailto:k...@google.com>> wrote: > > I disagree strongly here - I don't think the wiki will have appropriate > polish for users. Even if carefully polished I don't think the presentation > style is right, and it is not flexible. Power users will find it, of course. > > I wasn't imagining a wiki as a platform for developers to author > documentation, rather a place for users to author content for other users > (tips and tricks, handy PTransforms, etc.) at a much lower bar than expecting > users to go in and update our documentation. I agree with the goal of not > (further) fragmenting our documentation. > > As for mixing contributor vs. user information on the same site, I think it's > valuable to have some integration and treat the two as a continuum (after > all, our (direct) users are already developers) and consider it an asset to > have a "contribute" heading right in the main site. (Perhaps, if it's > confusing, we could move it all the way to the right.) I don't think we'll be > doing ourselves a favor by blinding copying all the existing docs to a wiki. > That being said I think it makes sense to start playing with using a wiki, > and see how much value that adds on top of what we already have. > > > On Fri, Jun 8, 2018 at 12:05 PM Thomas Weise <t...@apache.org > <mailto:t...@apache.org>> wrote: > +1 most of the contributor material could live on Wiki and there it will be > easier to maintain (perhaps the lower bar for updates will lead to more > information and increased maintenance). Contribution policy related material > should remain on the website and go through proper review/versioning. > > > On Fri, Jun 8, 2018 at 11:44 AM, Udi Meiri <eh...@google.com > <mailto:eh...@google.com>> wrote: > (a) Yes. > (b) I'm interested in putting documentation for contributors there. (test > triage guide, precommit and postcommit guidelines, processes, etc.) > It'd be faster than having to go through the motions of a github pull request > and a review process. > (c) Anything that goes to a wide audience, such as SDK users. That would need > review. > > Also, have you looked at https://wiki.apache.org/general/ > <https://wiki.apache.org/general/> ? (not sure if that's Confluence) > > > On Fri, Jun 8, 2018 at 10:07 AM Andrew Pilloud <apill...@google.com > <mailto:apill...@google.com>> wrote: > +1 It would be really nice to have a lightweight place to share that is more > searchable then random Google docs. > > Andrew > > On Fri, Jun 8, 2018 at 9:35 AM Anton Kedin <ke...@google.com > <mailto:ke...@google.com>> wrote: > +1 > > (a) we should; > (b) I think it will be a good place for all of the things you list; > (c) introductory things, like "getting started", or "programming guide" that > people not deeply involved in the project would expect to find on > beam.apache.org <http://beam.apache.org/> should stay there, not in the wiki; > > On Fri, Jun 8, 2018 at 12:56 AM Etienne Chauchot <echauc...@apache.org > <mailto:echauc...@apache.org>> wrote: > Hi Kenn, > I'm +1 of course. I remember that you and I and others discussed in a similar > thread about dev facing docs but it got lost at some point in time. > IMHO > > I would add > - runners specifics (e.g. how runners implement state or timer, how they > split data into bundles, etc...) > - probably putting online the doc I did for nexmark that summarizes the > architecture and pseudo code of the queries (because some are several > thousand lines of code). I often use it to recall what a given query does. > > I would remove > - BIPs / summaries of collections of JIRA > because it is hard to maintain and will end up being out of date I think. > > Etienne > > Le jeudi 07 juin 2018 à 13:23 -0700, Kenneth Knowles a écrit : >> Hi all, >> >> I've been in half a dozen conversations recently about whether to have a >> wiki and what to use it for. Some things I've heard: >> >> - "why is all this stuff that users don't care about here?" >> - "can we have a lighter weight place to put technical references for >> contributors" >> >> So I want to consider as a community starting up our wiki. Ideas for what >> could go there: >> >> - Collection of links to design docs like >> https://beam.apache.org/contribute/design-documents/ >> <https://beam.apache.org/contribute/design-documents/> >> - Specialized walkthroughs like >> https://beam.apache.org/contribute/docker-images/ >> <https://beam.apache.org/contribute/docker-images/> >> - Best-effort notes that just try to help out like >> https://beam.apache.org/contribute/intellij/ >> <https://beam.apache.org/contribute/intellij/> >> - Docs on in-progress stuff like >> https://beam.apache.org/documentation/runners/jstorm/ >> <https://beam.apache.org/documentation/runners/jstorm/> >> - Expanded instructions for committers, more than >> https://beam.apache.org/contribute/committer-guide/ >> <https://beam.apache.org/contribute/committer-guide/> >> - BIPs / summaries of collections of JIRA >> - Docs sitting in markdown in the repo like >> https://github.com/apache/beam/blob/master/sdks/CONTAINERS.md >> <https://github.com/apache/beam/blob/master/sdks/CONTAINERS.md> and >> https://github.com/apache/beam-site/blob/asf-site/README.md >> <https://github.com/apache/beam-site/blob/asf-site/README.md> (which will >> soon not be a toplevel README) >> >> What do you think? >> >> (a) should we do it? >> (b) what should go there? >> (c) what should not go there? >> >> Kenn >