Yes. Also, do we want ALL issues for all repos in one place? Or issues for each repo with the repo? The usual pro/cons. I suggest for ease of finding/usability of newcomers ALL issues in same place, but anything fine for me
On Fri, Jun 9, 2023, 11:16 PM Joshua Poore <poor...@me.com.invalid> wrote: > I’m in the repo right now, I can write up some issues, but we have to go > to infra to set up a new repo—essentially, we’ll clone the current > Apache/Flagon and Apache/Flagon-Website, then remove all the integrations > stuff. Then we can set up GitHub actions for automation way easier managing > merges between master and asf-site. > > > On Jun 9, 2023, at 10:13 PM, Austin Bennett <aus...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > sounds great ... Do you think we need to writeup issues, and see if > > concrete/bite-size enough to get any committers or > > contributors/future-committers to help address? > > > > Anyone have an interest and bandwidth to address? > > > > On Fri, Jun 9, 2023 at 6:56 PM Joshua Poore <poor...@apache.org> wrote: > > > >> Recent PR from Austin raised an excellent point about the current > >> structure of our Apache/Flagon repo. > >> > >> Presently, this repo contains: > >> > >> 1. Website assets > >> 2. Integration examples (e.g., ELK) > >> > >> Keeping this repo together as a jumble of top level “utilities” does > >> prevent us from improving automation in builds and tests for our > website, > >> in particular. > >> > >> Proposal: Let’s split this repo into two. Establish an > >> Apache/Flagon-Website repo, and maintain automated builds and tests for > our > >> website. > >> > >> Thoughts? > >
