I guess the added value are the examples, which are nice to have for
someone that is learning.

On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 5:15 PM, Aljoscha Krettek <[email protected]>
wrote:

> About the "Java API Transformations" Page. Why do we have it? The
> operations are described in the Javadoc for DataSet and Grouping.
> Having it duplicated here just means that we always have to keep it in
> sync. We could just have a link to the Javadoc in the Programming
> Guide in addition to the operations overview.
>
> What do you think?
>
> On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 3:48 PM, Kostas Tzoumas <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > I like the new look as well. You could call it "Contents"
> >
> > Kostas
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 3:40 PM, Aljoscha Krettek <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> 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
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >>
> >>
>

Reply via email to