Thanks for raising this, JB! +1 on having tooling to keep the documentation in sync with the code, that would be a big improvement to save a lot of manual work. Looking forward to a PR.
Yufei On Tue, Dec 16, 2025 at 8:48 AM Adam Christian < [email protected]> wrote: > Hi JB, > > I agree that it is suboptimal to have the tool documentation separate from > the repository because developers cannot keep the documentation and > features aligned. In addition, the versioning of tools will become a larger > headache as Robert and Pierre are nearing the completion of the > Polaris-Tools release process. > > I believe this is worth pursuing because I think the maintenance of another > docs site is worth the benefits. > > With the recent Tools Doc PR [1], we have a good place to link out to these > tools. Hopefully, that can give us a good starting point for the Tools > documentation in the Polaris-Tools repository. > > [1] - https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/3189 > > Go community, > > Adam > > On Tue, Dec 16, 2025, 8:04 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Hi folks, > > > > Currently, the website and documentation for Polaris are stored within > the > > polaris repository. > > > > While this structure works well for documenting the Polaris design, > server, > > and CLI, it doesn't effectively cover the documentation for the > associated > > tools (Catalog Migrator, Benchmark, MCP Server, and Console). > > > > I propose we consider having the specific tool documentation to the > > polaris-tools repository. This would ensure the documentation remains > > up-to-date with the latest tool features. We could then link to this > > documentation from the main website (currently in the polaris repo). > > > > Thoughts on this approach? > > > > Regards, > > JB > > >
