I think that providing documentation for jvsd before it is included in the source and binary release distributions will only confuse users. +1 for removing.
Anthony > On Sep 22, 2016, at 2:39 PM, Dave Barnes <dbar...@pivotal.io> wrote: > > JVSD has appeared in the Geode user manual since M2. See > http://geode.docs.pivotal.io/docs/tools_modules/jvsd.html. > Kirk, are you recommending that we remove this? > > On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 10:57 AM, Kirk Lund <kl...@apache.org> wrote: > >> I would recommend not mentioning jVSD at all in the Geode 1.0 docs. Right >> now it's just a Jira ticket and feature branch. I think the docs should >> only cover what's in Geode 1.0. >> >> If there's some doc or wiki page about proposed future features or features >> currently looking for contributors/developers, then that would probably be >> an appropriate place to mention jVSD. >> >> Thanks, >> Kirk >> >> On Thursday, September 22, 2016, Joey McAllister <jmcallis...@pivotal.io> >> wrote: >> >>> Bumping this. Any thoughts? >>> >>> On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 10:50 AM Dave Barnes <dbar...@pivotal.io >>> <javascript:;>> wrote: >>> >>>> To what degree should jVSD be mentioned in the docs? The current >> writeup >>> is >>>> essentially "go get it if you want it, but be warned that it's not >> fully >>>> baked and we don't support it". >>>> Would that still be the appropriate jVSD policy for 1.0.0? >>>> >>>> On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 10:42 AM, Dan Smith <dsm...@pivotal.io >>> <javascript:;>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> I don't think we should try to include jVSD in 1.0.0 at this point, >>>> because >>>>> it introduces dependencies that might make the 1.0.0 release more >>>>> complicated such as the MultiAxisChartFX dependency. But I think the >>>> should >>>>> try to get it to develop sooner rather than later to make it easier >> for >>>>> people to get jVSD and play with it. >>>>> >>>>> -Dan >>>>> >>>> >>> >>
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
