I agree there are some parts that are common, and should remain common. Then
there are other parts that are very specific to a release and should be in a
per release directory. Moving ASAP on this makes since to me.
- Bobby
On Friday, February 26, 2016 12:28 PM, Jungtaek Lim <[email protected]>
wrote:
Maybe we should adopt it ASAP, since links for source code seems to be
already broken by two huge changes.
Please refer https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-1581 for more.
(Thanks Abhishek)
1. moved package (which is already addressed to 1.x)
2. now porting clojure to java (only master)
So, we should at least maintain three versions of docs, 0.x and 1.x, and
2.x (master).
What do you think?
Regards,
Jungtaek Lim (HeartSaVioR)
2016년 2월 26일 (금) 오전 1:39, Abhishek Agarwal <[email protected]>님이 작성:
> I have seen Apache Pig publishing a version specific documentation which is
> generated through forrest.
> e.g.
> http://pig.apache.org/docs/r0.13.0/
> http://pig.apache.org/docs/r0.14.0/
>
> Documentation is kept in the same branch in a separate folder. I haven't
> looked in details but we can definitely borrow ideas from them.
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 10:50 PM, Kyle Nusbaum <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-1502 -- Kyle
> >
> > On Sunday, January 24, 2016 4:29 PM, Jungtaek Lim <[email protected]
> >
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> > +1 for having version specific docs.
> >
> > We move docs to asf-site branch, and now we have only one REST API doc.
> for
> > 1.0.0 and later versions.
> >
> > It would also great to describe available versions for each API, but just
> > having whole copy may be easier.
> > Same things may be applied to new features.
> >
> > - Jungtaek Lim (HeartSaVioR)
> >
> > 2016년 1월 25일 (월) 오전 12:19, Matthias J. Sax <[email protected]>님이 작성:
> >
> > > +1 for having documentation for older releases on the website and
> > > JavaDocs for each version, too.
> > >
> > > Btw: in the Flink project this process is automated completely. I am
> not
> > > sure exactly how, but could figure it out. However, the documentation
> is
> > > not part of the project website itself but hosted at ci.apache.org
> > >
> > > Having this automated, is very nice for people how are using the
> current
> > > Snapshot version, as the new docs get available very soon when
> something
> > > changes.
> > >
> > > -Matthias
> > >
> > >
> > > On 01/22/2016 11:59 PM, Nathan Marz wrote:
> > > > At the very least, the Javadocs should be available by version. This
> is
> > > > something I used to do but looks like we forgot to keep doing that
> > after
> > > > the transition to Apache. Maintaining other docs (tutorials, etc.) by
> > > > version is more difficult as those are rarely updated at the time of
> > > > release.
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 2:01 PM, Bobby Evans <[email protected]>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> It doesn't have to be Taylor cutting releases. The only major
> > > requirement
> > > >> around that is that the PMC votes on the release.
> > > >> - Bobby
> > > >>
> > > >> On Friday, January 22, 2016 3:48 PM, Kyle Nusbaum
> > > >> <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> Yep, That's precisely what I was thinking.
> > > >>
> > > >> I don't really see a problem with the process being manual. It won't
> > be
> > > >> *too* much work, and we do releases infrequently enough that I don't
> > > see it
> > > >> as a burden. A small helper script would probably be trivial to
> write.
> > > >>
> > > >> Of course, Taylor is the one cutting the releases, so I'll defer to
> > him
> > > on
> > > >> the automated/manual issue. -- Kyle
> > > >>
> > > >> On Friday, January 22, 2016 3:45 PM, P. Taylor Goetz <
> > > >> [email protected]> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> I’m definitely open to improving the process such that we can have
> > > >> version-specific documentation, and finding a way to automate
> updating
> > > the
> > > >> asf-site branch during the release process. I’m also okay if that
> > > process
> > > >> is somewhat manual.
> > > >>
> > > >> I’ve thought about it a little but haven’t really come with a
> process.
> > > >>
> > > >> Ideally we’d do something that would do a snapshot of the docs at
> > > release
> > > >> time and create a subdirectory in the asf-site website (e.g.
> > > “1.0.0-docs”).
> > > >>
> > > >> I’m open to suggestions.
> > > >>
> > > >> -Taylor
> > > >>
> > > >>> On Jan 22, 2016, at 4:25 PM, Kyle Nusbaum <[email protected]
> > > .INVALID>
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>> The new website is awesome.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Tt would be great to keep tabs on documentation for different
> > versions
> > > >> of Storm and host those different versions on the site.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> I don't care too much for having all the documentation in its own
> > > >> branch. I would suggest that each version branch of Storm keeps its
> > own
> > > >> version of the docs -- or keeps any modifications to the docs, if
> not
> > > the
> > > >> entire collection, in order to keep the common parts in sync -- and
> > that
> > > >> these docs get merged into the asf-site branch in their own version
> > > >> directory as part of the release process.
> > > >>> Please let me know what you think and I'll file Jira issues as
> > > >> necessary.-- Kyle
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Abhishek Agarwal
>
