I prepared a PR[1] to clarify this. [1] https://github.com/apache/calcite/pull/2907
Benchao Li <[email protected]> 于2022年9月15日周四 09:14写道： > Stamatis, > > Instead of removing the manual instructions[1], I think it's better to > rephrase > it to mention the automation site releasing as Francis already suggested. > This will be helpful for the next RMs. > > [1] > https://github.com/apache/calcite/blob/main/site/README.md#publishing-the-website > > Stamatis Zampetakis <[email protected]> 于2022年9月14日周三 22:01写道： > >> Thanks for the feedback Benchao! >> >> CALCITE-3129 was committed on 31/03/2022. >> CALCITE-5092 was reported on 13/04/2022. >> >> According to the comments in CALCITE-5092, the problem was resolved after >> releasing 1.31.0. >> I assume that automation scripts, introduced by CALCITE-3129, were >> triggered after the release and correctly updated the javadoc fixing the >> problem mentioned in CALCITE-5092. >> With the automation enabled we shouldn't touch the calcite-site repo [1] >> manually thus I would suggest removing the manual instructions from here >> [2] to avoid confusion. >> If we happen to find a problem in the site generation then we should >> investigate the root cause and if necessary modify the automation scripts. >> >> Best, >> Stamatis >> >> [1] https://github.com/apache/calcite-site >> [1] >> >> https://github.com/apache/calcite/blob/main/site/README.md#publishing-the-website >> >> On Wed, Sep 14, 2022 at 2:10 AM Benchao Li <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > Stamatis, >> > >> > I didn't know CALCITE-3129 before. >> > I was tracking CALCITE-5092 at that time, and I did some experiments >> > locally, >> > and reproduced the problem reported in CALCITE-5092, hence I thought >> that >> > this was the reason. I added that section in case that we will run into >> the >> > same >> > problem. >> > >> > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-5092 >> > >> > Stamatis Zampetakis <[email protected]> 于2022年9月13日周二 15:23写道： >> > >> > > The new section about publishing-the-website [1] has been added rather >> > > recently. >> > > >> > > @Benchao Since you added this section can you explain the intention >> > behind >> > > it? >> > > As Francis mentioned, after CALCITE-3129, the automatic workflow >> should >> > > take care of everything. >> > > >> > > Best, >> > > Stamatis >> > > >> > > [1] >> > > >> > > >> > >> https://github.com/apache/calcite/blob/main/site/README.md#publishing-the-website >> > > >> > > On Sun, Sep 11, 2022 at 2:29 AM Francis Chuang < >> [email protected] >> > > >> > > wrote: >> > > >> > > > It's fine to update the calcite.version and the news item in the >> same >> > > > commit as the workflow only looks at site files that were changed. >> > > > >> > > > The commits should always be pushed to main. The workflow >> automatically >> > > > cherry-picks the commit to site if it satisfies the following rules: >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> https://github.com/apache/calcite/blob/main/.github/workflows/publish-non-release-website-updates.yml#L23 >> > > > >> > > > Once cherry-picked to site, it automatically builds the site and >> > > > publishes it. >> > > > >> > > > In summary, commits should always be pushed to main and the workflow >> > > > will take care of the rest. Would you be able to update >> > > > https://github.com/apache/calcite/blob/main/site/README.md with >> this >> > new >> > > > information? I think it would be very helpful for the next RM. I >> > noticed >> > > > there's a section talking about copying the generated site to the >> > > > calcite-site repo >> > > > ( >> > > > >> > > >> > >> https://github.com/apache/calcite/blob/main/site/README.md#publishing-the-website >> > > ) >> > > > >> > > > but I don't think we need to do that at all since the workflow / >> > > > automation takes care of it. Maybe it can be removed? >> > > > >> > > > Francis >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > On 11/09/2022 10:17 am, Julian Hyde wrote: >> > > > > Thanks for the information, Francis. >> > > > > >> > > > > I wrote the news item after the release, as part of the commit >> that >> > > > > advanced the version number, and pushed that commit to main. >> Should I >> > > > have >> > > > > split it into separate commits? Or pushed to site rather than >> main? >> > > > > >> > > > > FWIW, I was able to get the site to rebuild by making a trivial >> > change >> > > to >> > > > > the news item and pushing to main. I then used a force-push to >> back >> > it >> > > > out >> > > > > from both main and site branches. So everything is good now. The >> > > > artifacts, >> > > > > news item, history, and javadoc for 1.32 are all deployed. >> > > > > >> > > > > Julian >> > > > > >> > > > > On Sep 10, 2022, at 4:05 PM, Francis Chuang < >> > [email protected]> >> > > > > wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > > The site and javadocs are automatically published when a release >> is >> > > > tagged >> > > > > using this workflow: >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> https://github.com/apache/calcite/blob/main/.github/workflows/publish-website-on-release.yml >> > > > > >> > > > > New news items should be automatically published via this >> workflow: >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> https://github.com/apache/calcite/blob/main/.github/workflows/publish-non-release-website-updates.yml >> > > > > >> > > > > I can see that the workflow for the news item failed due to the >> > commit >> > > on >> > > > > site being on main already: >> > > > > >> > > >> https://github.com/apache/calcite/runs/8286036230?check_suite_focus=true >> > > > > >> > > > > Did you manually cherry-pick/rebase the commit to main? I think >> I'll >> > > need >> > > > > update the workflow to account for this edge case. >> > > > > >> > > > > Francis >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > On 11/09/2022 2:57 am, Julian Hyde wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > > Does anyone (probably a previous release manager) know whether the >> > > > > site, javadoc, news are published automatically by release >> scripts? >> > > > > It seems that the site and javadoc are generated automatically on >> > > > release. >> > > > > But if I add a news item after the release and push it to main, >> does >> > > > > the site get regenerated? It doesn't seem so [1]. The instructions >> > > > > seem to indicate that pushing to the 'site' branch is sufficient >> [2]. >> > > > > Julian >> > > > > [1] https://calcite.apache.org/news/ >> > > > > [2] >> https://calcite.apache.org/docs/howto.html#publishing-a-release >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > >> > Best, >> > Benchao Li >> > >> > > > -- > > Best, > Benchao Li > -- Best, Benchao Li
