Mentors, Should anyone in PPMC be able to merge PRs on GitHub? I don't have access to do that for this PR.
Thanks Vinoth On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 12:01 PM Vinoth Chandar < mail.vinoth.chan...@gmail.com> wrote: > Bumpingn this thread again. > > Once we reciew and land the PR, it will be easy to make incremental > changes to reflect new guidelines and docs tooling > > On Tue, Feb 5, 2019 at 8:49 AM Vinoth Chandar < > mail.vinoth.chan...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Great points! Docker definitely could be useful to provide a standard >> Jekyll, ruby build environment. >> Something, that Nishith himself had trouble with. >> >> On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 7:09 AM Thomas Weise <t...@apache.org> wrote: >> >>> A pull request is the common way to propose changes in other projects, so >>> that's good. >>> >>> One of the things you will want to work on going forward are contributor >>> guidelines that explain this, among other things. >>> >>> Other suggestions (that can all be taken up as follow-up, perhaps worth >>> creating a JIRAs): >>> - Source file should have license headers >>> - Take a look at other incubator and top level projects for web site >>> commonalities such as community / contributing sections >>> - Consider adding a README to the web site sources folder and a build >>> script that shields developers from error prone manual steps >>> - Docker is a good way to avoid having to install pieces on the host OS >>> (example: >>> >>> https://flink.apache.org/improve-website.html#update-or-extend-the-documentation >>> ) >>> - Maybe in the future you want to separate web site sources from >>> documentation (since documentation is usually specific to versions) >>> >>> Thomas >>> >>> >>> >>> On Sun, Feb 3, 2019 at 11:05 PM nishith agarwal <n3.nas...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>> > Hi All, >>> > >>> > I've altered the documentation and created a PR against the "asf-site" >>> > branch due to absence of a master branch (instead of pushing to a >>> branch >>> > directly). In the comments, I've tried to explain the changes I made. >>> In >>> > summary, most of our packages, metadata for datasets, admin client and >>> more >>> > are named with "hoodie". For now, I've just made some cosmetic name >>> changes >>> > in the docs from "hoodie" -> "hudi" since performing a widespread >>> rename >>> > does not make sense. >>> > My guess is we can have an initial version of the site ready with such >>> > changes, iterate on it and come up with a plan as we migrate the >>> codebase >>> > but I'd love to hear your thoughts around this. >>> > >>> > Thanks, >>> > Nishith >>> > >>> > On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 2:38 PM nishith agarwal <n3.nas...@gmail.com> >>> > wrote: >>> > >>> > > Yes, I'll get to it later tonight. >>> > > >>> > > Thanks, >>> > > Nishith >>> > > >>> > > On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 1:04 PM Vinoth Chandar <vin...@apache.org> >>> > wrote: >>> > > >>> > >> Nishith, are you working on the site? Just wanted to confirm and >>> see if >>> > >> you >>> > >> need more help from one of us. >>> > >> >>> > >> On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 8:21 PM Vinoth Chandar < >>> > >> mail.vinoth.chan...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> > >> >>> > >> > What thomas says, makes sense to me. For now, we can just import >>> site >>> > >> into >>> > >> > asf-site and make a call on what we check into master down the >>> line? >>> > >> > >>> > >> > On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 8:17 PM Vinoth Chandar < >>> > >> > mail.vinoth.chan...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> > >> > >>> > >> >> 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 >>> > >> >>> > > >>> > >> >>> > >>> > >> >>> >>> > >> >> >>> > >> >>> > > >>> > >>> >>
