Yes, I know, their documentation structure is quite good and I'm obviously inspired by it. :D Does anyone think this could become a problem?
The problem with "Overview" is that it is not clear whether it's an overview of the documentation or Apache Flink in general. But ok, let's go with Overview if no-one objects. I mention the Programming Guide in the first Paragraph but If you come up with something better feel free to add it. I think doing PRs agains my repo should be easiest. @robert: I'm now also generating the javadoc via jekyll, it's in _plugins/copy_api_dirs.rb On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 3:27 PM, Ufuk Celebi <[email protected]> wrote: > I like it very much, but a) there are some typos and minor issues, and b) > it looks very much like [1] (I'm pointing this out without any judgement). > > Regaring a) Should we post issues here or do a PR against your repo? > > - I don't like the top link "Doc"... let's just called it what it is: > "Overview". > - And maybe let's put more attention on the link "Flink Programming Guide" > under "Programming Guides" somehow, because this is the "main" programming > guide. > > [1] https://spark.apache.org/docs/latest/ > > On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 3:12 PM, Aljoscha Krettek <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> I updated the Documentation, now I need some eyeballs to look this >> thing over so could you please have a look and tell me what you think. >> :D >> >> I added and overview page, the programming guide and the examples are >> now unified. I also did some little touchups here and there. >> >> To build it just checkout my scala-rework branch and run the docs build >> script: >> https://github.com/aljoscha/incubator-flink/tree/scala-rework >> >> cd docs >> ./build_docs.sh -p >> >> On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 11:50 AM, Kostas Tzoumas <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > +1 >> > >> > I think a standalone docs site with a different nav bar will be more >> > usable. >> > >> > On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 11:03 AM, Aljoscha Krettek <[email protected]> >> > wrote: >> > >> >> > However, this would make the documentation even more complicated. >> >> >> >> Exactly, that's what I'm trying to avoid. >> >> >> >> If nobody has anything against it I will try to make the documentation >> >> self contained, move navigation to the top bar, and generally make >> >> things less cumbersome. :D >> >> >> >> On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 10:35 AM, Robert Metzger <[email protected]> >> >> wrote: >> >> > Hi Aljoscha, >> >> > >> >> > I think it should not be too difficult to have different menu layouts >> for >> >> > the different versions of the website documentation. However, this >> would >> >> > make the documentation even more complicated. >> >> > >> >> > I'm also unhappy with the current setup of the documentation. The >> >> > maintenance is quite time-consuming, so I'm happy if you come up with >> a >> >> > simpler approach. >> >> > >> >> > I agree with having a self contained documentation. This would also >> allow >> >> > us to make it part of the release votes and ship it with the binary >> >> > releases. >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > I think it would be fine to just hardcode a link to >> >> > flink.incubator.apache.org into the standalone documentation. >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > Robert >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 9:45 AM, Aljoscha Krettek < >> [email protected]> >> >> > wrote: >> >> > >> >> >> Hi, >> >> >> I'm right now rewriting the documentation to unify the Java API/Scala >> >> >> API parts with tabs to switch between language (mentioned that >> before, >> >> >> I know. :D). >> >> >> >> >> >> The problem is now that the doc is very tightly integrated into the >> >> >> website. For example, the sidebar of links is part of the website. >> >> >> (The self contained doc also has the sidebar of links, but if you >> look >> >> >> closely you will notice it's slightly different.) It is the same for >> >> >> the 0.6 doc and the 0.7 doc, which doesn't work well when those two >> >> >> docs have different pages with differing names. >> >> >> >> >> >> Would it not be easier to make the documentation completely self >> >> >> contained (as it already is) and copy the built files into the >> >> >> website's doc folder. The website would then just have links to the >> >> >> documentation for the separate versions. >> >> >> >> >> >> The problem would then be that the documentation doesn't share the >> >> >> same header as the website anymore. I don't see this as a problem, we >> >> >> could even move the documentation navigation into the header and out >> >> >> of the sidebar. Some people might object though. >> >> >> >> >> >> What do you think? How should we handle this? >> >> >> >> >> >> Cheers, >> >> >> Aljoscha >> >> >> >> >> >>
