+1 to Pavel's proposal, > Markdown can also be visualized by many IDEs, so it is easy to edit locally. IDEA shows Markdown out of the box.
Yakov, > having docs under separate git repository We should not use separate git repo, Apache Ignite repo should be used. Documentation should be a part of pull request. On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 10:08 AM, Pavel Tupitsyn <ptupit...@apache.org> wrote: > Denis, > > > Could you show me any example of such a documentation where docs are > stored in git and can be visualized by GitHub (dev stage) and 3rd party > engine (release on the site)? > > 1) Apache Spark > Source: https://github.com/apache/spark/tree/master/docs > Docs: https://spark.apache.org/documentation.html > (uses Jekyll) > > 2) Microsoft .NET > Source: https://github.com/dotnet/docs > Docs: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/ > (uses DocFX) > > > Both of these engines (Jekyll and DocFX) use markdown, which can be > visualized by github, and converted to HTML for the web site. > Markdown can also be visualized by many IDEs, so it is easy to edit > locally. > > Ideally, API docs (javadoc) should be integrated with the rest of the docs, > so users can navigate to the corresponding APIs. > This can't be achieved nicely with readme.io. > > > > having docs under separate git repository > I don't think we need a separate repo, we can just create branches in our > main repo for that. > It is nice to have everything in one place. > > On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 6:30 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <dsetrak...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 8:15 PM, Yakov Zhdanov <yzhda...@apache.org> > > wrote: > > > > > I would also consider having docs under separate git repository. > Separate > > > since we need to have an opportunity to revisit documentation for > already > > > released versions. > > > > > > > This should not be a problem. > > >
