Actually, it looks like the staging/docs-grant1 branch has *only* the docs files, not anything else. If you are seeing directories like geode-core in your local checkout of the branch, it's probably because you had build artifacts in those directories and git left the directory around when you switched branches. I don't see any geode-* directories when I get a clean checkout or look at the branch on github <https://github.com/apache/incubator-geode/tree/staging/docs-grant1>.
I think we should just go ahead and create a feature branch off of the the current geode develop and merge these changes in as a geode-core subdirectory. We could start the work of cleaning up the build instructions, etc. right away on that feature branch. -Dan On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 4:03 PM, Dave Barnes <dbar...@apache.org> wrote: > Please help me understand the source-control setup for the donated Geode > docs. > Per the announcement: > > The donated source currently sits in a separate branch in the Geode > repository named staging/docs-grant1 > > I see when I check out the staging branch that the dozen or so user manual > source directories are located at the topmost level of the repo, > interspersed with source code directories. Another four individual files > are placed at the top level, also, including a README.md that overwrites > the README.md for the Geode code that I see when I'm working on the develop > branch. > > I think it would be easier to find the files and distinguish them from > source code if they were located in their own subdirectory, maybe > 'geode-docs' for example. This would be helpful during the comment period, > as well as later when the docs have been accepted as part of the main repo. > - To what extent is the directory structure dictated by Apache precedent? > - Can the locations be changed during the comment period? > - If not, can the locations be changed after the comment period, before the > branch is merged into the main repo? > > Thanks, > Dave Barnes >
