Hi David, thank you for all your contributions towards the website/docs, much appreciated :)
On Mon, Mar 23, 2020 at 7:17 AM David Jencks <[email protected]> wrote: > I have the components content pages for 3.0.x and 2.x rearranged as in > latest, and generating the index pages works fine for 3.0.x, but I don’t > think it’s practical to backport the table generation to 2.x. Is the list of > components, data formats, and languages sufficiently unlikely to change in > 2.x that a non-generated table would be OK? Sounds good to me > For comparison, these pages in latest: > https://camel.apache.org/components/latest/index.html > <https://camel.apache.org/components/latest/index.html> > https://camel.apache.org/components/latest/dataformats/index.html > <https://camel.apache.org/components/latest/dataformats/index.html> > https://camel.apache.org/components/latest/languages/index.html > <https://camel.apache.org/components/latest/languages/index.html> > > I’m proposing to hand edit these to contain appropriate entries for 2.x. > > At this point I’m not planning to create EIP documentation for 2.x and 3.0.x. > > It looks like the catalog builds for 2.x and 3.0.x use asciidoctorj to > translate a lot of asciidoc. Perhaps this should be removed? I think we have a consensus that we'll add new features to 3.x only. I think we need to take care that the code generation doesn't overwrite those manual changes. Disabling some/most of the code generation on 2.x makes sense to me. Other cameleers, do chime in with your thoughts. zoran -- Zoran Regvart
