On Sun, Aug 29, 2021 at 10:20 AM David Jencks <david.a.jen...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> The current source state is now visible.
>
> - I npm-published my asciidoctor-jsonpath extension
> - The site content changes are at https://github.com/djencks/camel.git 
> jsonpath-options branch. I’ve put all the generated changes as the last 
> commit, so it should be possible to update the branch by dropping the last 
> commit, rebasing on main, and regenerating the source with the maven build.
> - The camel-website changes are at 
> https://github.com/djencks/camel-website.git issue-16854-jsonpath-options 
> branch
>
> There’s a PR https://github.com/apache/camel-website/pull/614.
>
> I don’t understand what the patch-sitemap.js does and was having dependency 
> problems so removed it from the command line.  What does it do and why?
>
> The PR’s build fails because of missing ui bundle.  Is this expected?  I like 
> to have the built UI bundle available somewhere: I often check in the built 
> bundle.  Locally I can’t build the UI, it complains somehow about the helpers 
> for component sorting/hiding.
>
> I set up the build to fail on warnings, and there are quite a few warnings.
>
> There are several source problems I don’t know the proper fix for as it 
> requires domain knowledge.  One is these warnings:
>
> [00:47:14.821] WARN (asciidoctor): skipping reference to missing attribute: 
> apisyntax
>     file: 
> docs/components/modules/ROOT/pages/google-calendar-stream-component.adoc
>     source: https://github.com/djencks/camel.git (refname: jsonpath-options, 
> start path: docs/components)
> [00:47:15.979] WARN (asciidoctor): skipping reference to missing attribute: 
> apisyntax
>     file: docs/components/modules/ROOT/pages/google-mail-stream-component.adoc
>     source: https://github.com/djencks/camel.git (refname: jsonpath-options, 
> start path: docs/components)
> [00:47:16.442] WARN (asciidoctor): skipping reference to missing attribute: 
> apisyntax
>     file: 
> docs/components/modules/ROOT/pages/google-sheets-stream-component.adoc
>     source: https://github.com/djencks/camel.git (refname: jsonpath-options, 
> start path: docs/components)
>
>
> These three components are missing an apisyntax entry in their json files.  
> The problem shows up in the current site as the literal string ’null’.
>

Ah yeah it looks like the -stream components are not API based, I am
going to fix this for Camel 3.12.


> There are some inconsistencies and mysteries in the gulpfile.js. I’ve 
> commented on some.
>
> It would be great to know if anyone else can build the site from the PR 
> branch.
>
> David Jencks
>
> > On Aug 23, 2021, at 6:00 AM, Claus Ibsen <claus.ib...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi
> >
> > Ah yeah those were an idea to include the full page documentation in
> > case tooling may be able to use that for something useable.
> > However the tooling uses all the other bits, so we have just marked
> > those apis as deprecated.
> >
> > So we can remove the files from the camel-catalog.
> > I have created a ticket to remove them
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CAMEL-16881
> >
> > On Sun, Aug 22, 2021 at 9:48 AM Zoran Regvart <zo...@regvart.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi David,
> >>
> >> On Sat, Aug 21, 2021 at 10:10 PM David Jencks <david.a.jen...@gmail.com> 
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I have a question about the purpose of the .adoc files in the catalog.  
> >>> The changes proposed here will remove the tables of options from these 
> >>> copies of the component .adoc files.  These copies are already quite 
> >>> skimpy as they don’t successfully include the spring-boot information.
> >>>
> >>> What are these copies of the .adoc files supposed to be useful for?
> >>
> >> I think the catalog contains those so that an alternative UI can show
> >> them, think tooltips or inline help in an IDE. I think, though I'm not
> >> 100% sure that VSCode tooling is using that...
> >>
> >>> If there’s a desire to make them more complete, one strategy would be to 
> >>> build the components module of the website using a custom UI that has 
> >>> nothing in it, so we just get plain undecorated html pages, and putting 
> >>> those in the catalog.  It would require some investigation, but it might 
> >>> conceivably be possible to arrange so links out of the components module 
> >>> go to the website rather than just be broken.
> >>
> >> I'd keep it as simple as it can be, so plain .adoc files, or if we
> >> find out they're not used just remove them...
> >>
> >> 2c
> >>
> >> zoran
> >> --
> >> Zoran Regvart
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Claus Ibsen
> > -----------------
> > http://davsclaus.com @davsclaus
> > Camel in Action 2: https://www.manning.com/ibsen2
>


-- 
Claus Ibsen
-----------------
http://davsclaus.com @davsclaus
Camel in Action 2: https://www.manning.com/ibsen2

Reply via email to