On 13.03.2015 01:17, Dmitriy Setrakyan wrote: > Roman, > > Unfortunately we are forced at this point to take the same path as DataStax > with planetcassandra.org (granted, of course, that community agrees). Here > are the main reasons: > > 1. We have already invested over a month of very hard and scrupulous labor > on producing documentation in readme.io and simply do not have another > month to do it in another tool. (I have sent out my first email about > readme.io on Feb 9 and unfortunately got feedback about it not being > genuine from ASF standpoint only a month later)
I wonder what's the rush here. You don't have a deadline, neither for publishing the docs nor for graduating from the Incubator. > 2. Readme.io gives a huge productivity boost for creating documentation by > providing various CSS templates, versioning, wysiwyg editor, and community > forum. I am not aware of any Markdown tool with such capabilities, and even > if we find one, we probably would spend another month editing CSS just to > make it look as pretty. > > I appreciate everyone's feedback on this. If there are no objections, I > will start editing documentation to make sure that it has proper use of > Apache trademarks and attributions. > > D. > > On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 10:58 AM, Roman Shaposhnik <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 9:54 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan >> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> I understand that no-one is trying to make things harder, but at the same >>> time, I mostly hear "DON'T DO THIS" and "DON'T DO THAT". What I would >>> appreciate is if we all tried to come up with a way to keep docs in >>> readme.io (especially given that many within community sweated for the >> past >>> month on adding documentation to readme.io). >>> >>> I have several questions: >>> >>> 1. Is this technicality about which tool is used to create >> documentation >>> documented somewhere? I cannot find anything. I treat readme.io as a >>> tool for creating documentation which I then add to GIT. >> It is about where the canonical source of truth is. You *have* to have it >> at *.apache.org. You're more than welcome to have mirrors all over >> the place, of course. >> >> There's also a matter of fostering the community by lowering the barrier >> of entry. As a developer on the project I would really appreciate if >> changing documentation followed the same process as changing code. >> This is not a hard requirement, but it really helps. I don't want yet >> another >> process. I want to be able to commit to the same repo. >> >>> 2. Are 3rd parties allowed to provide documentation for Apache >> Projects >>> (cannot imagine why not or how we can stop them)? If so, we can >> maintain >>> this documentation as provided by 3rd party and treat Javadoc, which >> is >>> part of the source code, as the primary source documentation for >> Apache >>> Ignite. Also, all pages important to the community, like "Get >> Involved" for >>> example, will be kept directly on the Ignite website. >> You can, of course, splinter your documentation. Case in point: >> http://planetcassandra.org/ >> which is operated by DataStax folks. However, as a general recommendation >> I will really encourage you NOT to do so for core project. >> >> Thanks, >> Roman. >>
