Guess it does nt clutter source code with docs, js, css etc? On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 7:46 PM nishith agarwal <n3.nas...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I vote for #3 as well. Yes, I'll take up the lead on this. > BTW, why is creating a separate branch (asf-site) so popular ? I see that > many projects have done that. > > Thanks, > Nishith > > On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 2:13 PM Anbu Cheeralan <anc...@apache.org> wrote: > > > I prefer #3 that will keep the documentation in-sync with the code. > > > > On 2019/01/24 21:27:39, Vinoth Chandar <mail.vinoth.chan...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > Hello all, > > > > > > Just summarizing how the current project documentation is setup and > then > > > use this thread to discuss how we want to proceed. Its based on Jekyll > > and > > > markup.To build Hudi docs, you just need to install gem/ruby set and > spin > > > up Jekyll. > > > https://idratherbewriting.com/documentation-theme-jekyll/ has > > > instructions. > > > > > > We have a few options to manage docs. > > > > > > 1. Separate repo (away from source code) > > > 2. Special branch along with code (asf-site branch here > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-hudi ) > > > 3. Checked into a top level docs folder on all branches (current > > approach) > > > > > > I vote for #3. I have do #2 on a previous open source project and the > > code > > > kept diverging from docs. > > > > > > What do you all think? > > > > > > Nishith, can you confirm you are taking the lead on this? > > > > > > Thanks > > > Vinoth > > > > > >
