Just to chime in, I'm almost done with the changes to the website code that allows the user to select the version of documentation they wish to see (haosdent is reviewing the final revisions), and it does depend on using git to checkout the previous versions of the website via tags, so if we did isolate the website code to a specific branch or repo, we would also need to ensure that the tags of commits to the website code stay in sync with tags of commits to the actual code. This would not be too challenging, but something to keep in mind.
Keeping the website code in a separate repository might be easier to manage from this perspective, since tags are effectively global to a given repo, so if we kept the website code in a special branch within the main repo, we'd need something like a tag called "1.3.0" for the main code, and "website-1.3.0" for the website code, which could be confusing. On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 8:53 PM Vinod Kone <vinodk...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks for the analysis Benjamin. Really appreciate it. > > You bring up good points esp about size bump for supporting multiple > versions. > > Btw, do the numbers change if publish content is only in a branch ? Guess > not? > > Maybe we can start with a separate git repo and see if it's painful enough > to merge it into our source repo. > > @vinodkone > > > On Jun 1, 2017, at 4:06 PM, Benjamin Bannier < > benjamin.bann...@mesosphere.io> wrote: > > > > Hi Vinod, > > > >> *Implementation details: * > >> > >> We have an option to move to > >> 1) a standalone git repo (say "mesos-site") which will be mirrored on > >> github. > >> 2) just use our "mesos" git repo and publish a "asf-site" branch with > >> website contents (say at 'site/publish' directory) > >> > >> I'm leaning towards 2) because that allows us to deal with single repo > >> instead of two. > > > > I have never updated the website so I cannot comment on the pain > involved. > > > > As a user of the Mesos source git repository I would however like to > bring up that _all_ of the website’s assets are generated from files > present in the source repository (at some point in time). The largest > fraction of the `publish` directory is Doxygen documentation (currently > >90% at ~100 MB). We should weigh the effect this would have for developers > should we add this content to the Mesos source repository. > > > > To get a ballpark idea I imported the website’s history into a git > repository. After the initial import its `.git` directory contained ~100 MB > which went down to ~30MB after aggressive repository repacking. A fresh > clone of the Mesos source repository amounts to ~280 MB, so it seems we > would add at least 10% to the repositories size with little benefit to > developers. Depending on the implementation, this number would likely > increase would we e.g., provide version-dependent website content, or > introduce website asset formats not compressing as nicely with git (e.g., > generated graphics). > > > > I have the feeling keeping this content in a separate repository might > strike a better balance for developers. > > > > > > Benjamin > > >
